From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765796AbXGYX0T (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:26:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758574AbXGYX0M (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:26:12 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:35281 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758542AbXGYX0L (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:26:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:25:28 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: "Masoud Sharbiani" Cc: "Andi Kleen" , "Kirill Korotaev" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: i386-show-unhandled-signals-v3 Message-Id: <20070725162528.7d485ff8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <4517d1380707251407v178068baxcc76a86f8337cc27@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070718154759.GA26425@google.com> <46A76210.5020903@openvz.org> <200707251657.44217.ak@suse.de> <20070725140455.cbbc0dde.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <4517d1380707251407v178068baxcc76a86f8337cc27@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:07:56 -0700 "Masoud Sharbiani" wrote: > On 7/25/07, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:57:43 +0200 > > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday 25 July 2007 16:45, Kirill Korotaev wrote: > > > > plz don't enable it by default... :/ > > > > any user can spam syslog with these messages and if syslog is run as root > > > > can take the whole diskspace... > > > > > > There are plenty of other ways to cause syslog messages anyways; > > > > tell us what they are and we'll fix them? > > > > > this argument is 100% bogus. > > > > people don't like leaving themselves open to logspamming. > > > > > > For this particular issue: someone please send a patch. > > > Andrew, > This is rate limited; Do you need me to rewrite it with it being > disabled by default? > Yes please. Look: if there's a way in which an unprivileged user can trigger a printk we fix it, end of story. I don't know why this even slightly controversial.