Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 10 May 2004 20:59:51 -0500 | | From | Matt Mackall <> | | Subject | Re: 2.6.6-mm1 |
| |
On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 04:33:17PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > * Chris Wedgwood (cw@f00f.org) wrote: > > On Mon, May 10, 2004 at 03:02:03PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > > Capabilities are broken and don't work. Nobody has a clue how to > > > provide the required services with SELinux and nobody has any code > > > and we need the feature *now* before vendors go shipping even more > > > ghastly stuff. > > > > eh? magic groups are nasty... and why is this needed? can't > > oracle/whatever just run with a wrapper to give the capabilities out > > as required until a better solution is available > > I agree. I have a patch that at least fixes this bit of capabilities > (currently, what you suggest doesn't work right), which could easily be > dusted off and resent. > > And while we're at it, it would be nice to have the working bits of > memlock rlimits going. At least the mlock() users would get some help > (i.e. gpg).
mlock() rlimits make sense independent of Oracle. There are a number of things (realtime, security, iscsi) that might make good use of small amounts of locked memory.
> Another bit I could resend (removing the broken shm bits, > of course). It's just those pesky shm segs having their own lifecycle > which breaks the hugetlb and SHM_LOCK attempts to use memlock rlimits.
They have a lifecycle like files (they live on a filesystem, after all), which is why I suggest we need quota there. Again, something that has sensible uses independent of Oracle.
-- Matt Mackall : http://www.selenic.com : Linux development and consulting - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |