On 02/20/2018 08:26 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Andrew Morton
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:53:50 -0500 Waiman Long wrote:
>>
>>> Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
>>> forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One
On 02/20/2018 06:17 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:53:50 -0500 Waiman Long wrote:
>
>> Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
>> forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One may
>> try to write extreme parameter values to see if they
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Andrew Morton
wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:53:50 -0500 Waiman Long wrote:
>
>> Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
>> forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One may
>> try to write extreme parameter values to s
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 03:17:05PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:53:50 -0500 Waiman Long wrote:
>
> > Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
> > forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One may
> > try to write extreme parameter
On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:53:50 -0500 Waiman Long wrote:
> Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
> forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One may
> try to write extreme parameter values to see if they get clamped.
> To make it easier, a warning with t
Even with clamped sysctl parameters, it is still not that straight
forward to figure out the exact range of those parameters. One may
try to write extreme parameter values to see if they get clamped.
To make it easier, a warning with the expected range will now be
printed in the kernel ring buffer
6 matches
Mail list logo