Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 01:03:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 01:03:06 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:22545 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 26 Nov 2002 01:03:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 07:10:21 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Patrick Finnegan , Andi Kleen Cc: Jeff Dike , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: uml-patch-2.5.49-1 Message-ID: <20021126061021.GA17959@wotan.suse.de> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 660 Lines: 15 > One reason I can think of is that it prevents 'stupid things' happening > under a copy of UML from killing the OS UML is running under... Eg. if a > process is running under UML because it's not trusted and then turns into > a forkbomb, you don't want that taking down the host OS. You could limit that with an appropiate ulimit. Also a 'mm-bomb' could be similarly deadly without appropiate host limits. -Andi - 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/