* Roland McGrath ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > * Roland McGrath ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Indeed, I think your patch does not go far enough. I can read POSIX to > > > say > > > that the siginfo_t data must be available when `kill' was used, as well. > > > > How? I only see reference to filling in SI_USER for rt signals? > > Just curious...(I've only got SuSv3 and some crusty old POSIX rt docs). > > There is stuff about a SA_SIGINFO signal handler's siginfo_t argument > "shall contain" the various specified information like si_pid/si_uid values > for a kill caller.
OK, guess it's odd corner case, since they aren't queued anyway. > > Good point. Although it's RLIMIT_SIGPENDING + (31 * user_nprocs). So > > that could be 31 * 8k, for example. > > And a "good point" back to you, sir! I think the right way to think about > this in terms of resource consumption is that sizeof(struct sigqueue)*31 is > part of the potential per-process overhead that make up the consumption > units one should have in mind when choosing how to set the RLIMIT_NPROC limit. As in dynamic, and work with the patch that you sent to redo default sigpending as per nproc? thanks, -chris -- Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
