[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] no RLIMIT_NPROC for root, please
> > > Hardcoding things signifying special treatment of uid=0 is almost always a
> > > bad idea. If you _really_ think that superuser (whatever entity that might
> > > be) should be exempt from RLIMIT_NPROC and can prove that (SuSv2 seems to
> > > be silent so you may be right), then you should use capable() to do proper
> > > capability test and not that horrible explicit uid test as in your patch
> > > above.

I totally agree with you, Pavel. But while we are on this subject --
shouldn't the explicit check like this:

* Use a reserved one if we're the superuser
if (files_stat.nr_free_files && !current->euid)
goto used_one;

in fs/file_table.c:get_empty_filp() be switched to capabilities? I.e. is
the hardcoded euid=0 value intentional there or is it an omission?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:49    [W:0.047 / U:0.692 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site