On April 20, 2016 4:50:53 AM PDT, "Austin S. Hemmelgarn"
wrote:
>On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>
>>> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin"
>wrote:
Perhaps a (privileged)
On April 20, 2016 4:50:53 AM PDT, "Austin S. Hemmelgarn"
wrote:
>On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>
>>> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin"
>wrote:
Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit,
>then.
On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then.
Something we can implement if asked for.
However, I
On 2016-04-19 23:27, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then.
Something we can implement if asked for.
However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>>
>>Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then.
>>Something we can implement if asked for.
>>
>>However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved pool
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
> On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>>
>>Perhaps a (privileged) option to exempt from the global limit, then.
>>Something we can implement if asked for.
>>
>>However, I wouldn't be 100% that the reserved pool isn't used. Someone
>>added it
On April 19, 2016 6:24:12 PM PDT, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>>
>> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config
>option.
>
>So just to show what I want to
On April 19, 2016 6:24:12 PM PDT, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
>>
>> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config
>option.
>
>So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch
>on top of my (now merged)
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config option.
So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch
on top of my (now merged) cleanup patch that actually does
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> I _violently_ oppose the stupid DEVPTS_MULTIPLE_INSTANCES config option.
So just to show what I want to actually happen, here's the hacky patch
on top of my (now merged) cleanup patch that actually does what I want
devpts to do.
I say
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> Linus Torvalds writes:
>>
>> No.
>>
>> We want to get *rid* of the idiotic "primary instance" crap.
>
> That is actually pretty much the opposite of what you said last time,
> but
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> Linus Torvalds writes:
>>
>> No.
>>
>> We want to get *rid* of the idiotic "primary instance" crap.
>
> That is actually pretty much the opposite of what you said last time,
> but having looked at the cost to maintian a "primary
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>>"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>
- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
/proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs
On April 19, 2016 12:25:03 PM PDT, "H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>>"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>
- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
/proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed.
Eric
On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>
>>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
>>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed.
>>>
>>>Eric
>>
>> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount
On April 19, 2016 12:03:47 PM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>
>>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
>>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed.
>>>
>>>Eric
>>
>> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option
>
>There
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed.
>>
>>Eric
>
> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option
There is a max option so pty capping is a per devpts option.
> ,
"H. Peter Anvin" writes:
>>- Support for reserving ptys for the system devpts instance using
>> /proc/sys/kernel/pty/reserve needs to be removed.
>>
>>Eric
>
> pty capping should probably be a devpts mount option
There is a max option so pty capping is a per devpts option.
> , and perhaps a
>
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>> wrote:
>>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance
>of
>>> devpts.
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>> wrote:
>>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance
>of
>>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>> wrote:
>>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance
>of
>>> devpts.
On April 19, 2016 11:22:24 AM PDT, ebied...@xmission.com wrote:
>Linus Torvalds writes:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
>> wrote:
>>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance
>of
>>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
> wrote:
>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
>> the code
Linus Torvalds writes:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
> wrote:
>> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
>> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
>> the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
> the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally
>
On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 8:35 AM, Eric W. Biederman
wrote:
> The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
> devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
> the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally
> mounted instance of devpts
The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally
mounted instance of devpts when it is not currently mounted by
userspace. The new helper
The devpts filesystem has a notion of a system or primary instance of
devpts. To retain the notion of a primary system instance of devpts
the code needs a way to allow userspace to mount the internally
mounted instance of devpts when it is not currently mounted by
userspace. The new helper
28 matches
Mail list logo