On 10/10/2017 02:04 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
> distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
> contains a few problems:
>
> 1 - procfs signed wrap: echo'ing a large number into
>
On 10/10/2017 02:04 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
> distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
> contains a few problems:
>
> 1 - procfs signed wrap: echo'ing a large number into
>
Reviewed-by: Mikulas Patocka
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
> distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
> contains a few problems:
>
> 1 - procfs signed
Reviewed-by: Mikulas Patocka
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
> distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
> contains a few problems:
>
> 1 - procfs signed wrap: echo'ing a large
While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
contains a few problems:
1 - procfs signed wrap: echo'ing a large number into
/proc/sys/fs/pipe-max-size and then cat'ing it back out shows a
While backporting Michael's "pipe: fix limit handling" patchset to a
distro-kernel, Mikulas noticed that current upstream pipe limit handling
contains a few problems:
1 - procfs signed wrap: echo'ing a large number into
/proc/sys/fs/pipe-max-size and then cat'ing it back out shows a
6 matches
Mail list logo