public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] pull request for writable limits for 2.6.34-rc0
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:31:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BC58B85.1020204@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BAA4595.3050203@gmail.com>

On 03/24/2010 06:02 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03/21/2010 07:38 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> Or even just _one_ system call that takes two pointers, and can do an 
>> atomic replace-and-return-the-old-value, like 'sigaction()' does, ie 
>> something like
>>
>> 	int prlimit64(pid, limit, const struct rlimit64 *new, struct rlimit64 *old);
>>
>> wouldn't that be a nice generic interface?
> 
> Seconded. But should the limits be by default 64-bit even on 32-bit? I
> mean: switch 'struct limit' in signal_struct to 'struct rlimit64'? This
> would make the limits non-atomic on 32-bit. Oh, they are not already if
> reader wants both cur and max without any locks, but I'm not sure now
> what implications this will have (I haven't checked compilers, but I
> think a store of 00000001 0000000 in place of 00000000 ffffffff may
> result in a read of 00000001 ffffffff or alike). Or did I misunderstand you?

Maybe it is a silly question or you was just busy at that time?

thanks,
-- 
js

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-14  9:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-07 16:52 [PULL] pull request for writable limits for 2.6.33-rc1 Jiri Slaby
2009-12-09 19:25 ` [PULL] pull request for writable limits for 2.6.33-rc0 Jiri Slaby
2009-12-11 11:05   ` [git pull -resend] " Jiri Slaby
2009-12-23  9:40     ` Jiri Slaby
2010-01-02 21:40   ` [PULL] " Jiri Kosina
2010-01-02 21:52     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-01-04 21:59       ` Jiri Kosina
2010-01-04 10:47   ` [PULL] pull request for limits FIXES for 2.6.33-rc Jiri Slaby
2010-01-04 10:48     ` [PATCH 1/3] SECURITY: selinux, fix update_rlimit_cpu parameter Jiri Slaby
2010-01-05 15:50       ` David Howells
2010-01-04 10:48     ` [PATCH 2/3] resource: move kernel function inside __KERNEL__ Jiri Slaby
2010-01-04 10:48     ` [PATCH 3/3] resource: add helpers for fetching rlimits Jiri Slaby
2010-03-05 16:53 ` [git pull] pull request for writable limits for 2.6.34-rc0 Jiri Slaby
2010-03-20 19:20   ` Linus Torvalds
2010-03-21  1:45     ` Neil Horman
2010-03-21  6:06     ` Alexey Dobriyan
2010-03-21 18:38       ` Linus Torvalds
2010-03-24 17:02         ` Jiri Slaby
2010-04-14  9:31           ` Jiri Slaby [this message]
2010-05-05 12:12         ` Resource limits interface proposal [was: pull request for writable limits] Jiri Slaby
2010-05-05 15:08           ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-06  6:39             ` Alexey Dobriyan
2010-05-06 15:37               ` Linus Torvalds
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 01/11] rlimits: security, add task_struct to setrlimit Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 02/11] rlimits: add task_struct to update_rlimit_cpu Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 03/11] rlimits: make sure ->rlim_max never grows in sys_setrlimit Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 04/11] rlimits: split sys_setrlimit Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 05/11] rlimits: allow setrlimit to non-current tasks Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 06/11] rlimits: do security check under task_lock Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 07/11] rlimits: add rlimit64 structure Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 08/11] rlimits: redo do_setrlimit to more generic do_prlimit Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 09/11] rlimits: switch getrlimit to do_prlimit Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  9:02                   ` [PATCH v2 09/11] rlimits: switch more rlimit syscalls " Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  9:05                     ` Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH " Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 10/11] rlimits: implement prlimit64 syscall Jiri Slaby
2010-05-07  8:55                 ` [PATCH 11/11] unistd: add __NR_prlimit64 syscall numbers Jiri Slaby
2010-05-06 15:46             ` Resource limits interface proposal [was: pull request for writable limits] Jiri Slaby
2010-03-24 17:04     ` [git pull] pull request for writable limits for 2.6.34-rc0 Jiri Slaby

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=4BC58B85.1020204@gmail.com \
    --to=jirislaby@gmail.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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