lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM
    * Matt Mackall (mpm@selenic.com) wrote:
    > On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:54:05PM -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
    > > Note that sched_setschedule() provides no way to handle the mlock()
    > > requirement, which cannot be done from another process.
    >
    > I'm pretty sure that part can be done by a privileged server handing
    > out mlocked shared memory segments.

    It can actually be done with plain ol' rlimits (RLIMIT_MEMLOCK).

    > The trouble with introducing something into the kernel is that once
    > done, it can't be undone. So you're absolutely going to meet
    > resistance to anything that can be a) done sufficiently in userspace
    > or b) can reasonably be done in a more generic manner so as to meet
    > the needs of a wider future audience. The onus is on the submitter to
    > meet these requirements because we can't easily kick out a broken API
    > after we accept it.

    Indeed (although in this case it's not adding an API as much as using an
    existing one).

    thanks,
    -chris
    --
    Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:4.872 / U:0.124 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site