lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/4] posix-timers: limit the number of posix timers per process
On 08/31/2011 01:02 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:47:47 -0700
> Andi Kleen<ak@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>> Yes, deployment for new rlimits is a big PITA. It would be sensible to
>>> modify the shells to take some anonymous numeric argument, so you could
>>> do
>>>
>>> ulimit 42 1000
>>>
>>> to set rlimit number 42 if your shell version doesn't understand the
>>> symbolic representation of more recent additions. Who do I call?
>>
>> I guess sending a patch to the bash maintainers?
>>
>
> That would help ;) And all the other shells :(
>
> It would be worth going back and taking another look at the writable
> /proc/<pid>/limits patches (http://lwn.net/Articles/365732/). Why
> didn't that work get merged?

This turned out to be too heavy-weight. We ended up having prlimit64
syscall. I.e. most of the pull request was merged. But not the 2 patches
for writable /proc/.../limits.

With that syscall we might augment coreutils (or better kernel/tools to
be updated properly) by a tool such as `prlimit', I think. Actually
something I had when I was testing the syscall:
https://github.com/jirislaby/collected_sources/blob/master/lim/lim.c#L1

regards,
--
js
suse labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-31 08:47    [W:0.912 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site