Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 3 Aug 2004 23:22:31 +0200 | | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | | Subject | Re: [patch] mlock-as-nonroot revisted |
| |
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 05:13:56PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 3 Aug 2004, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > > > - if (shmflg & SHM_HUGETLB) > > > + if (shmflg & SHM_HUGETLB) { > > > + /* hugetlb_zero_setup takes care of mlock user accounting */ > > > file = hugetlb_zero_setup(size); > > > + shp->mlock_user = current->user; > > > + } else { > > > where do you change mlock_user in chown? > > You don't. Normal users aren't allowed to chown each > other's files, nor are they allowed to "give away" one > of their files to somebody else. > > On unlock the quota gets deducted from the user who > created the hugetlbfs file. > > This means there shouldn't be security issues with this > approach. Let me know if I've overlooked one.
I agree there aren't security issues, but it's still very wrong to charge the old user if the admin gives the locked ram to a new user. This erratic behaviour shows how much the rlimit approch is flawed for named fs objects that have nothing to do with the transient task that created them. - 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/
|  |