malloc(3) ignores RLIMIT_DATA
kostikbel at gmail.com
Tue Feb 19 19:38:52 UTC 2008
On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 06:58:08PM +0000, Robert Watson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Jason Evans wrote:
> >>As sbrk() is less preferable because of framentation and race conditions,
> >>why not to create mmap() flag MMAP_DSS to check RLIMIT_DATA and to use it
> >>in malloc(3) ?
> >There has been general agreement among the people I've discussed this
> >issue with that the correct solution is to add a separate resource limit
> >for anonymously mapped memory, which would provide capabilities similar to
> >what your suggestion would provide.
> Konstantine has updated his patches and reported on them in the recent
> status report:
> Here's the main site for information on the patch:
> He describes a per-uid limit, but I think it might also be useful to have a
> per-process limit tht can also be enforced, although possibly not by
> default, so that protecting applications from each other doesn't require
> creating separate users for them.
Yes, per-process limits can be added too, although it would require some
additional thinking. The persistent objects backed by anonymous memory,
like SysV shm or shm_open(2) handles would be billed for the creator
only. It is not immediately obvious whether it is right or not.
Anyway, I want to get the review first, before doing further
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/attachments/20080219/e1f93cb2/attachment.pgp
More information about the freebsd-current