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
next prev parent 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).