Re: [PATCH] ilp32: fix {GET,SET}SIGMASK request for ptrace

Hi Zhou, Thank you for the patch. The idea is ok, but patch format got broken for some reason. Could you re-send it? Yury. On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 12:49:05PM +0800, zhouchengming wrote: > atus: RO > Content-Length: 4732 > Lines: 181 > > The function compat_ptrace_request(used by ilp32) don't

[PATCH] ilp32: fix {GET,SET}SIGMASK request for ptrace

The function compat_ptrace_request(used by ilp32) don't handle {GET,SET}SIGMASK request, so it will be handled by ptrace_request. But it's wrong because the compat_sigset_t of ilp32 differs from the sigset_t of aarch64. The patch fixes it. Signed-off-by: Zhou Chengming

Re: [PATCH 12/19] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

The {GET,SET}SIGMASK request of ptrace on ilp32 is wrong, it's handled by ptrace_request(like aarch64). So I write a patch to fix it(just for ilp32). I will send the patch next. Thanks! On 2016/6/18 7:54, Yury Norov wrote: Here new aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introsuced to avoid run-time

Re: [PATCH 17/23] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On 2016/6/25 22:15, Bamvor Zhang wrote: Hi, Chengming On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, zhouchengming wrote: On 2016/6/9 1:00, Yury Norov wrote: On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:34:09AM +0800, zhouchengming wrote: On 2016/5/24 8:04, Yury Norov wrote: Here new

Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: pids: show number of failed forks since limit reset

Hello, On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 09:34:41PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: > If a user has a setup where they wait for notifications on changes to > pids.event, and then auto-adjust the cgroup limits based on the number of > failures you have a race condition between reading the pids.event file and >

Re: [PATCH] capabilities: add capability cgroup controller

Hello, Topi. On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Topi Miettinen wrote: > The parent might be able do it if proc/pid/xyz files are still > accessible after child exit but before its exit status is collected. But > if the parent doesn't do it (and you are not able to change it to

Re: [PATCH] capabilities: add capability cgroup controller

On 06/24/16 17:24, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, Serge. > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 11:59:10AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: >>> Just monitoring is less jarring than implementing security enforcement >>> via cgroup, but it is still jarring. What's wrong with recursive >>> process hierarchy

Re: [PATCH] capabilities: add capability cgroup controller

On 06/24/16 17:21, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > "Serge E. Hallyn" writes: > >> Quoting Tejun Heo (t...@kernel.org): >>> Hello, >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:59:16AM -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: Quoting Tejun Heo (t...@kernel.org): > But isn't being recursive

Re: [PATCH 1/2] cgroup: pids: show number of failed forks since limit reset

On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 01:00:48PM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote: This allows users to dynamically adjust their limits based on how many failed forks happened since they last reset their limits, otherwise they would have to track (in a racy way) how many limit failures there were since the last