Re: A variant of mlockall()

From: Lorenzo Allegrucci (lenstra@tiscalinet.it)
Date: Sat May 20 2000 - 09:00:02 EDT

  • Next message: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "Re: [PATCH] small rtc.c fix"

    On 20/05/00 00:30, Igmar Palsenberg wrote:
    > On Fri, 19 May 2000, Lorenzo Allegrucci wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > Is there a simple and natural way to lock memory of a process
    > > from another process?
    > > I mean, POSIX1.b standard mlockall() does not provide a pid selection.
    > > You can only use it from inside the process you want to lock memory.
    > > Wouldn't be useful a mlockall(int flags, int pid) ?
    >
    > It's a security risk, and I don't see how it is usefull.

    Why?
    You can restrict mlockall() between processes with the same uid.
    Where is the security risk?
    I think it is a flexible solution to control memory locking from
    another process without to apply to tricks.
    A way for dynamically enable (and disable too) memory locking
    to a process. 

    -- 
Lorenzo

    -
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 20 2000 - 09:35:47 EDT