From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, DSA <debian-admin@lists.debian.org>,
team@security.debian.org, libpam-modules@packages.debian.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.28, rlimits, performance and debian etch
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2009 11:59:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fxj74pol.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <497A3E62.6010706@caviumnetworks.com> (David Daney's message of "Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:02:10 -0800")
* David Daney:
> One problem is that for values of RLIMIT_NOFILE less than something
> like 4096, it is much faster to call sys_close() on all possible
> values than iterate through a handful of open files from /proc/self/fd
> using opendir(3)/readdir(3).
Really? Yuck.
> The real solution is to convert your user space programs to use the
> new syscalls that allow for race-free setting of close-on-exec.
> Then you no longer need to mess around with iterating over these
> things.
These system calls are too recent to use in the next two Debian
releases. In addition, we can't really be sure that all libraries use
the new calls.
I find the design of the CLOEXEC business somewhat revulsive, by the
way. It reminds me of those DoSomethingEx APIs in another platform.
The *_at system calls are a similar wart. Even with this stuff, I
still can't safely open a file with a different effective user ID in a
multithreaded application, or create a AF_UNIX socket with specific
file system permissions. Some thread-specific context with what have
been traditionally considered per-process attributes might have been
better. 8-(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-25 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-21 11:52 2.6.28, rlimits, performance and debian etch Peter Palfrader
2009-01-23 21:07 ` Florian Weimer
2009-01-23 22:02 ` David Daney
2009-01-23 23:11 ` Peter Palfrader
2009-01-25 10:59 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2009-01-27 23:17 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 12:19 ` Adam Tkac
2009-01-29 18:05 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 18:10 ` Peter Palfrader
2009-02-02 16:20 ` Adam Tkac
2009-02-08 22:31 ` Steve Langasek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-02-26 21:48 Frans Pop
2009-02-26 22:01 ` Steve Langasek
2009-02-27 7:30 ` Peter Palfrader
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=87fxj74pol.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de \
--to=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=debian-admin@lists.debian.org \
--cc=libpam-modules@packages.debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=team@security.debian.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