Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933627AbXHXAhu (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:37:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1764565AbXHXAhm (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:37:42 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.233]:11426 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1764058AbXHXAhl (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2007 20:37:41 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Vm+E3e0ZEfR1zhh+m7DNmEAwhzNml9bAzHmWAX/MWu8uOVrqoQ1XmgnMl16auaFLL6VqzOcn1J7UpQi7SjEWHtoFiZckZK5sJeXnJKg4p9fYrwJ+wG4HkxXFnK9PANDhDpDh1pJNQ7cXCJtlWXsWjtWi9hibeUfJgi1Q3b+VFKM= Message-ID: <7b9198260708231737r5709788bmec4d294361b21a4a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 01:37:40 +0100 From: "Tom Spink" To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Fork Bombing Patch In-Reply-To: <7b9198260708231737t33923ec6yde48bb1338a6fa70@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <25ae38200708152324t4cbadc24ge05cd75f8f0e60e4@mail.gmail.com> <46C4BC46.7000305@redhat.com> <25ae38200708200724sbce2749m7eb27565d7c84e5e@mail.gmail.com> <46C9A867.6090509@redhat.com> <25ae38200708212317h7776768v33a82f646ac6b749@mail.gmail.com> <46CDD98F.2020208@redhat.com> <7b9198260708231737t33923ec6yde48bb1338a6fa70@mail.gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1608 Lines: 43 On 23/08/07, Krzysztof Halasa wrote: > Chris Snook writes: > > > Wrapping a single printk that's unrelated to debugging in an #ifdef > > CONFIG_* or a sysctl strikes me as abuse of those configuration > > facilities. > > Abuse, probably not (if a thing is required on one system and must > not be on another, it has to be configurable). If the printk is > a good idea... IMHO hardly, at best. We don't warn about trying to > write to /vmlinuz after all. > > ulimit/pam_limits should fix the (IMHO nonexistent) problem nicely. > One has to plug all the holes, though (e.g. $HOME/.forward). > -- > Krzysztof Halasa > - > 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/ > Hi, I agree with Chris on this point, it seems like this sort of detection (and reporting) should be a job for a user-space daemon, rather than polluting kernel code (and logs) with warning messages of this sort... I don't think the type of warning this patch yields is appropriate for kernel logs, nor do I think the kernel should be the entity to decide that this warning should be given. It _feels_ wrong. -- Regards, Tom Spink University of Edinburgh - 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/