lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Realtime LSM
* Lee Revell (rlrevell@joe-job.com) wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 00:05, Jack O'Quin wrote:
> > The ulimit approach is way too cumbersome.
>
> Agreed. The whole point of getting realtime-lsm in the kernel is to
> make it _easier_ to get a linux audio (or other realtime system) up and
> running.

It's nice to have something that's easy to use, but that's not a great
justification for addition to the kernel. Esp. when there's a
functional userspace solution.

> Would it be feasible to use rlimits to let users run
> SCHED_FIFO processes?

No, it doesn't support that. I suppose it could, whether is should
is another matter.

> The ulimit approach would probably be acceptable
> if it subsumed all the functionality of the realtime-lsm module.

Hrm, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The whole point of the
mlock rlimits code is to enable this policy to be pushed to userspace.
A generic method of enabling capabilities is the best way to go, long
term. Any interest in pursuing that?

thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
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 14:06    [W:0.053 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site