Re: RT scheduling and a way to make a process hang, unkillable

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Mon, 2009-02-23 at 17:15 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 12:15:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 15:45 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote:
> > 
> > > sched: Don't allow setuid to succeed if the user does not have rt bandwidth
> > > 
> > > Corey Hickey reported that on using setuid to change the uid of a
> > > rt process, the process would be unkillable and not be running.
> > > This is because there was no rt runtime for that user group. Add
> > > in a check to see if a user can attach an rt task to its task group.
> > 
> > This looks good to me.
> > 
> > Does anybody object to the -ENOSPC return value? Should we introduce
> > -ENOTIME for that?
> > 
> > Michael, Alan?
> > 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Any comments on which return value to return? Should we introduce
> -ENOTIME?
> 
> Corey mentioned he found ENOSPC confusing.

I'd say go for the ENOTIME thing.

--
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/