Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?

• Next message: James Bourne: "re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25"
• Previous message: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: 2.4 delayed acks don't work, fixed"
• In reply to: Der Herr Hofrat: "bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Next in thread: Der Herr Hofrat: "Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Reply: Der Herr Hofrat: "Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 08:51:17 +0100 (CET) Der Herr Hofrat <der.herr@hofr.at> 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?

--
~Randy
-
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/

• Next message: James Bourne: "re: Ptrace hole / Linux 2.2.25"
• Previous message: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: 2.4 delayed acks don't work, fixed"
• In reply to: Der Herr Hofrat: "bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Next in thread: Der Herr Hofrat: "Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Reply: Der Herr Hofrat: "Re: bug in kernel/sysctl.c (SYSIPC) ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 22:00:24 EST