From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ucounts: Count rlimits in each user namespace
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2021 20:47:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj1z-NKxedgZvSS37iH=EKE47PkL=+BYccAUtsuB1sySQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87fsx1vcr9.fsf@disp2133>
On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 3:35 PM Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
>
> This is the work mainly by Alexey Gladkov to limit rlimits to the
> rlimits of the user that created a user namespace, and to allow users to
> have stricter limits on the resources created within a user namespace.
I guess all the performance issues got sorted, since I haven't seen
any reports from the test robots.
I do end up with two questions, mainly because of looking at the
result of the conflict resolution.
In particular, in __sigqueue_alloc(), two oddities..
Why the "sigpending < LONG_MAX" test in that
if (override_rlimit || (sigpending < LONG_MAX && sigpending <=
task_rlimit(t, RLIMIT_SIGPENDING))) {
thing?
And why test for "ucounts" being non-NULL in
if (ucounts && dec_rlimit_ucounts(ucounts,
UCOUNT_RLIMIT_SIGPENDING, 1))
put_ucounts(ucounts);
when afaik both of those should be happy with a NULL 'ucounts' pointer
(if it was NULL, we certainly already used it for the reverse
operations for get_ucounts() and inc_rlimit_ucounts()..)
Hmm?
And somebody should verify that I didn't screw anything up in my merge
resolution. It all looked very straightforward, but mistakes happen..
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-29 3:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-28 22:35 [GIT PULL] ucounts: Count rlimits in each user namespace Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-29 3:47 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2021-06-29 15:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-29 15:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-29 16:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-29 16:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-29 17:09 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-07-01 16:41 ` Alexey Gladkov
2021-07-01 20:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2021-06-29 17:17 ` Alexey Gladkov
2021-06-29 18:07 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-29 20:20 ` Alexey Gladkov
2021-06-29 20:33 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-29 21:22 ` Alexey Gladkov
2021-07-02 17:54 ` [PATCH] ucounts: Fix UCOUNT_RLIMIT_SIGPENDING counter leak Alexey Gladkov
2021-07-02 22:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-07-07 16:50 ` Alexey Gladkov
2021-07-07 17:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-07-08 10:33 ` [PATCH v2] " Alexey Gladkov
2021-07-08 18:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2021-07-08 11:00 ` [PATCH] ucounts: " Alexey Gladkov
2021-06-29 3:50 ` [GIT PULL] ucounts: Count rlimits in each user namespace pr-tracker-bot
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='CAHk-=wj1z-NKxedgZvSS37iH=EKE47PkL=+BYccAUtsuB1sySQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=containers@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=legion@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).