Re: IA32 syscall 311 not implemented on x86_64

[Denis Vlasenko]

On Monday 22 May 2006 01:37, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 22 May 2006 00:28, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 12:19:08AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> >  > >  > You make a good point.  In fact, given it's unthrottled, someone
> >  > >  > with too much time on their hands could easily fill up a /var
> >  > >  > just by calling unimplemented syscalls this way.
> >  > 
> >  > I never bought this argument because there are tons of printks in the kernel
> >  > that can be triggered by everybody.
> > 
> > Then they should also be either rate limited, or removed.
> 
> Yes let's remove all that kernel debugging support. It is totally useless
> for most users, isn't it?
> 
> Even if they are ratelimit you can still fill up /var.

If one has syslogd which does not rotate logs, [s]he gets what [s]he deserves.

There are two desirable properties of logs:
 (a) do not lose information (i.e. save entire log)
 (b) do not overflow log storage
and they are simply incompatible. You must pick one.

I took (b) and am a very happy user of daemontools' multilog ever since.
I never need to manually manage my logs again...
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/