From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 742F38D0001 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 21:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re:[PATCH v2]oom-kill: CAP_SYS_RESOURCE should get bonus From: "Figo.zhang" In-Reply-To: References: <1288662213.10103.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1288827804.2725.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 09:38:57 +0800 Message-ID: <1288834737.2124.11.camel@myhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: figo zhang , David Rientjes Cc: lkml , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Andrew Morton List-ID: > > > > On Thu, 4 Nov 2010, Figo.zhang wrote: > > > CAP_SYS_RESOURCE also had better get 3% bonus for protection. > > > > > Would you like to elaborate as to why? > > process with CAP_SYS_RESOURCE capibility which have system resource limits, like journaling resource on ext3/4 filesystem, RTC clock. so it also the same treatment as process with CAP_SYS_ADMIN. Best, Figo.zhang -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org