From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:42:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:42:45 -0500 Received: from chello212017098056.surfer.at ([212.17.98.56]:60166 "EHLO hofr.at") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 18 Mar 2003 13:42:43 -0500 From: Der Herr Hofrat Message-Id: <200303181856.h2IIu6b16953@hofr.at> Subject: Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ? In-Reply-To: <20030318104051.0fb171ed.rddunlap@osdl.org> from "Randy.Dunlap" at "Mar 18, 2003 10:40:51 am" To: "Randy.Dunlap" Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 19:55:36 +0100 (CET) CC: Der Herr Hofrat , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL60 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:51:17 +0100 (CET) Der Herr Hofrat wrote: > > | atleast in kernel 2.4.19 and 2.4.20 in kernel/sysctl.c shmmax and shmall use > | the proc_dointvec_minmax callback without passing a min/max value - is there > | a reson for this or is this a simple bug ? > | > | linux/kenrel/sysctl.c (line 221 for 2.4.19/20) > | > | #ifdef CONFIG_SYSVIPC > | {KERN_SHMMAX, "shmmax", &shm_ctlmax, sizeof (size_t), > | 0644, NULL, &proc_doulongvec_minmax}, > | {KERN_SHMALL, "shmall", &shm_ctlall, sizeof (size_t), > | 0644, NULL, &proc_doulongvec_minmax}, > | ... > | #endif > > The min and max values default to 0 if not specified (initialized), > and the _minmax functions have code to handle those cases. > > so as long as the intended min/max values were 0, I don't see a > problem. Are you seeing a problem? > not directly a problem - my assumption was that shmmax would be bounded in some way - currently you can write any value into /proc/sys/kernel/shmmax - and I don't think that the inteded behavior of this is to permit any value - or if it is - what is the point of using the _minimax and not simple proc_doulongvec ? hofrat