From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Set bounds on what /proc/self/make-it-fail accepts.
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 17:31:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140219223135.GB28876@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140219140021.f187b2cdc396dab44e680078@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:00:21PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I toyed with the idea of changing task_struct.make_it_fail to unsigned too,
> > but only realized I missed that after I'd sent out the diff.
>
> If we're touching the task_struct we could make it a bool.
>
> Or just a single bit(field). task_struct already has a bunch of
> bitfields in it (strangely, they aren't contiguous).
afaics, asides from brk_randomized, they're contiguous, and gcc dtrt..
unsigned int in_execve:1; /* 768:31 4 */
unsigned int in_iowait:1; /* 768:30 4 */
unsigned int no_new_privs:1; /* 768:29 4 */
unsigned int sched_reset_on_fork:1; /* 768:28 4 */
unsigned int sched_contributes_to_load:1; /* 768:27 4 */
So we could move the COMPAT_BRK ifdef and save 4 bytes for all the people still using libc5.
(Or those who are for some reason averse to heap randomization).
It's not really worth doing unless you're moving a bunch of other stuff around
in task_struct though, because as it is now, that struct has a bunch of alignment padding
& holes, so you're not going to save anything.
The other tricky part with reorganizing that struct is that so much of it is configurable.
Dave
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-19 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-18 22:06 [PATCH] Set bounds on what /proc/self/make-it-fail accepts Dave Jones
2014-02-18 22:32 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-18 23:27 ` Dave Jones
2014-02-19 13:48 ` Akinobu Mita
2014-02-19 21:37 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 21:40 ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-19 21:55 ` Dave Jones
2014-02-19 22:00 ` Andrew Morton
2014-02-19 22:07 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 22:31 ` Dave Jones [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140219223135.GB28876@redhat.com \
--to=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=akinobu.mita@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.