Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 3 Sep 2009 19:20:52 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | [PATCH 0/1] sys_setrlimit: make sure ->rlim_max never grows |
| |
On 09/03, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > On 09/02/2009 11:51 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 09/02, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> I can't think of anything else than doing all the checks and updates > >> under alloc_lock, introducing coarse grained static mutex in setrlimit > >> to protect it, > > > > Oh, please don't ;) > > > > Or I missed your point? > > > > But if you mean this series, then yes, I agree. > > Yes, I meant those. But I don't know what do you agree with :).
Not sure what I agree with, but I am glad we seem to agree with each other ;)
> > We should try to do something > > to ensure that at least rlim_max can be always lowered when admin writes to > > /proc/pid/limits. > > Yes, that's what I asked about when I wrote the three options which I > was able to think of above. So any other ideas about how to elegantly > protect against sys_setrlimit vs. admin+/proc/*/limits race?
Perhaps we should start these change with this patch (see the next email) ?
Perhaps, before your changes, we should "fix" sys_setrlimit() first ? Well, the patch (the next email) is not tested... What do you think?
Oleg.
| |