linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: luto@amacapital.net (Andy Lutomirski)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC, PATCHv2 29/29] mm, x86: introduce RLIMIT_VADDR
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 14:09:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXmdAnbgjsxw=qTbP2PhVCzE8v3y5XMt8DVa4P9DowsGA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21511994.eBlbEPoKOz@wuerfel>

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 10:29:33 AM CET Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> Hmm.  What if we approached this a bit differently?  We could add a
>> single new personality bit ADDR_LIMIT_EXPLICIT.  Setting this bit
>> cause PER_LINUX32_3GB etc to be automatically cleared.
>
> Both the ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT and ADDR_LIMIT_3GB flags I guess?

Yes.

>
>> When
>> ADDR_LIMIT_EXPLICIT is in effect, prctl can set a 64-bit numeric
>> limit.  If ADDR_LIMIT_EXPLICIT is cleared, the prctl value stops being
>> settable and reading it via prctl returns whatever is implied by the
>> other personality bits.
>
> I don't see anything wrong with it, but I'm a bit confused now
> what this would be good for, compared to using just prctl.
>
> Is this about setuid clearing the personality but not the prctl,
> or something else?

It's to avid ambiguity as to what happens if you set ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT
and use the prctl.  ISTM it would be nice for the semantics to be
fully defined in all cases.

--Andy

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-03 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20161227015413.187403-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
     [not found] ` <20161227015413.187403-30-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
2017-01-02  8:44   ` [RFC, PATCHv2 29/29] mm, x86: introduce RLIMIT_VADDR Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-03  6:08     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-03 13:18       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-03 18:29         ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-03 22:07           ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-03 22:09             ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2017-01-04 13:55               ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-03 16:04       ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2017-01-03 18:27         ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-04 14:19           ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2017-01-05 17:53             ` Andy Lutomirski

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='CALCETrXmdAnbgjsxw=qTbP2PhVCzE8v3y5XMt8DVa4P9DowsGA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).