From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751108AbWFRGuh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:50:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751109AbWFRGuh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:50:37 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:50952 "EHLO 1wt.eu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751108AbWFRGuh (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jun 2006 02:50:37 -0400 Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:48:32 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: marcelo@kvack.org, jolivares@gigablast.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH-2.4] allow core files bigger than 2GB Message-ID: <20060618064832.GA31066@1wt.eu> References: <20060617214507.GA1213@1wt.eu> <1150610993.3117.2.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1150610993.3117.2.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 08:09:53AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sat, 2006-06-17 at 23:45 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Marcelo, > > > > I think I have not sent you this one. It looks valid to me. > > I can queue it in -upstream if you prefer to pull everything > > at once. > > > Hi, > > This is a rather complex issue, to the point that your patch is not > sufficient actually. While it will create a core file, it's not really a > good one, and there are some nasty other issues with it (esp on 64 bit > systems). The enterprise distro kernels have a more complete patch for > this (I'm pretty sure both RH and SUSE have fundamentally the same patch > for this), if you really want this functionality I suggest getting the > patch from either of those distros to get the full thing (there's some > security angle to this even iirc). Thanks for notifying us about this Arjan. I've checked in RHEL patches and found that this is done in 2.4.21-binfmt-elf.patch with a detailed explanation. The patch is rather large, not to say invasive. I believe it serves other purposes but it seems to me that it will still be invasive enough not to be merged into 2.4 mainline right now. > Greetings, > Arjan van de Ven Regards, Willy