On Mon, 26.03.12 14:25, Frederic Crozat (fcro...@suse.com) wrote:
Heya,
> - currently, the limits are set on both rlim_cur and rlim_max (due to
> reuse of config_parse_limit code). I'd like to extend the
> implementation to support separate values for rlim_max and rlim_cur.
> But I'm not 100% sure how we should express that in configuration
> file. Should we use a additional keyword (LimitCPU / LimitSoftCPU ) or
> a dual value (LimitCPU=100;10) ?
I decided not to expose separate values for soft/non-soft on purpose. I
have the suspicion that they only make sense for user sessions, not so
much for system services,
I am mostly waiting for a usecase here. If somebody makes a good case
for hwo they should be useful in system services we can add support for
them, but otherwise I am not convinced.
We generally only expose kernel features we think are useful, but if
they aren't they are better hidden away.
> + for (i = 0; i < RLIMIT_NLIMITS; i++) {
> + if (!default_rlimit[i])
> + if (!(default_rlimit[i]= new(struct rlimit, 1)))
> + break;
> + getrlimit(i,default_rlimit[i]);
> + }
For new code we try to write
x = new(foobar, 1);
if (!x) {
...
}
rather than:
if (!(x = new(foobar, 1))) {
...
}
Also, you need to check for OOM here. And then, if it is clear that
getrlimit() will always return 0 here, then we should make that clear by
enclosing this in "assert_se(getrlimit(...) == 0)" or so.
But in general: why this code anyway? We should just let the pointer
point to NULL if there is not rlimit set. I.e. only those array entries
with non-default values should actually point to something.
>
> fn = arg_running_as == MANAGER_SYSTEM ? SYSTEM_CONFIG_FILE :
> USER_CONFIG_FILE;
> f = fopen(fn, "re");
> @@ -1400,6 +1424,15 @@ int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
> m->swap_auto = arg_swap_auto;
> m->default_std_output = arg_default_std_output;
> m->default_std_error = arg_default_std_error;
> + for (j = 0; j < RLIMIT_NLIMITS; j++) {
> + if (!m->rlimit[j])
> + if (!(m->rlimit[j]= new(struct rlimit, 1)))
> + break;
> +
> + (m->rlimit[j])->rlim_cur = default_rlimit[j]->rlim_cur;
> + (m->rlimit[j])->rlim_max = default_rlimit[j]->rlim_max;
> + }
Need to handle OOM. memdup() might be nicer to use here. (In fact, might
be worth introducing newdup() here as a type-safe macro, i.e. a
combination of new() and memdup()).
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
systemd-devel mailing list
systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
