Re: [patch] [sg]etaffinity hooks

From: Valdis.Kletnieksat_private
Date: Mon Oct 07 2002 - 11:23:25 PDT

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: [patch] [sg]etaffinity hooks" 

    On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:05:36 PDT, Seth Arnold <sarnoldat_private>  said:

> prevent cache thrashing; I don't see a point to mediating cpu affinity
> in an access control module. (Well, aside from covert timing channels,

Umm.. taking a shot in the dark here, but to make sure that one user can't
cause a DoS against some production workload that needs affinity?  It
would suck if your payroll system ran on a box that had 4 CPUs, and needed
to set affinity to 3 of them - and Fred J Nasty has already started 2
processes with affinity...
    _______________________________________________ linux-security-module mailing list linux-security-moduleat_private http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 11:24:23 PDT