lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] mlock-as-nonroot revisted
On Tue, Aug 03, 2004 at 05:31:08PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> If root wants to screw over a user, there's nothing we
> can do. I am not worried about the scenario you describe
> because hugetlbfs seems to be used only by Oracle anyway,
> so you won't run into issues like you describe.

hugetlbfs isn't only used by oracle. Anyways if you were right then why
is there a IPC_CAP_LOCK in hugetlbfs in the first place? If Oracle is
the only user then just drop such check and stop binding rlimits to
persistent fs objects.

> It would be different for a general purpose filesystem,
> but I'd like to see a usage case for your scenario before
> making the code overly complex.

if calling chown on hugetlbfs makes no sense then why is chown available
in the first place?
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans