From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Corey Hickey <bugfood-ml@fatooh.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@in.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
mtk.manpages@gmail.com, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: RT scheduling and a way to make a process hang, unkillable
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:59:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1235390396.4645.87.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090223114541.GD31277@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:15 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:15:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 15:45 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> >
> > > sched: Don't allow setuid to succeed if the user does not have rt bandwidth
> > >
> > > Corey Hickey reported that on using setuid to change the uid of a
> > > rt process, the process would be unkillable and not be running.
> > > This is because there was no rt runtime for that user group. Add
> > > in a check to see if a user can attach an rt task to its task group.
> >
> > This looks good to me.
> >
> > Does anybody object to the -ENOSPC return value? Should we introduce
> > -ENOTIME for that?
> >
> > Michael, Alan?
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> Any comments on which return value to return? Should we introduce
> -ENOTIME?
>
> Corey mentioned he found ENOSPC confusing.
I'd say go for the ENOTIME thing.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-23 12:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-15 0:51 RT scheduling and a way to make a process hang, unkillable Corey Hickey
2009-02-15 11:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-16 10:36 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-16 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-16 12:02 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-16 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-16 13:14 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-16 13:19 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-16 14:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-16 13:20 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-16 19:18 ` Corey Hickey
2009-02-17 5:00 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-17 10:15 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-17 11:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-18 0:09 ` Corey Hickey
2009-02-23 11:45 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-23 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-02-24 9:18 ` Dhaval Giani
2009-02-24 15:58 ` Andi Kleen
2009-02-24 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-24 19:29 ` Chris Friesen
2009-02-27 9:43 ` [PATCH] sched: Don't allow setuid to succeed if the user does not have rt bandwidth Dhaval Giani
2009-02-27 10:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-16 20:16 ` RT scheduling and a way to make a process hang, unkillable Kyle Moffett
2009-02-16 20:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-17 7:22 ` Dhaval Giani
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=1235390396.4645.87.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=balbir@in.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bugfood-ml@fatooh.org \
--cc=dhaval@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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