Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks
From: Alan Cox (alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: 11/12/05
- Previous message: Jesper Juhl: "Re: Patches for Kernel 2.6.14 on kernel.org"
- In reply to: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Next in thread: Claudio Scordino: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Reply: Claudio Scordino: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Chris Wright <chrisw@osdl.org> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 23:58:16 +0000
On Gwe, 2005-11-11 at 15:02 -0800, Chris Wright wrote:
> * Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote:
> > On Gwe, 2005-11-11 at 23:38 +0100, Claudio Scordino wrote:
> > > + if ((current->euid != tsk->euid) &&
> > > + (current->euid != tsk->uid)) {
> > > + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> >
> >
> > Would be -EPERM also wants a 'privilege' check. Not sure which would be
> > best here - CAP_SYS_ADMIN seems to be the 'default' used
>
> It's already available via /proc w/out protection. And ditto via posix
> cpu timers.
In which case the only comment I have is the one about accuracy - and
that is true for procfs too so will only come up if someone gets the
urge to use perfctr timers for precision resource management
-
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/
- Previous message: Jesper Juhl: "Re: Patches for Kernel 2.6.14 on kernel.org"
- In reply to: Chris Wright: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Next in thread: Claudio Scordino: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Reply: Claudio Scordino: "Re: [PATCH] getrusage sucks"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
