This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: prlimit64: inconsistencies between kernel and userland
- From: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>, aurelien at aurel32 dot net, linux-mips at linux-mips dot org, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 20:22:03 -0500
- Subject: Re: prlimit64: inconsistencies between kernel and userland
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20130628133835 dot GA21839 at hall dot aurel32 dot net> <20131104213756 dot GD18700 at hall dot aurel32 dot net> <20131104 dot 194519 dot 1657797548878784116 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1311050058580 dot 9883 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 01:04:45AM +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Aurelien Jarno <email@example.com>
> > Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 22:37:56 +0100
> > > Any news about this issue? It really starts to causes a lot of issues in
> > > Debian. I have added a Cc: to libc people so that we can also hear their
> > > opinion.
> > I had the same exact problem on sparc several years ago, I simply fixed
> > the glibc header value, it's the only way to fix this.
> > Yes, that means you then have to recompile applications and libraries
> > that reference this value.
> Surely you can create new symbol versions for getrlimit64 and setrlimit64,
> with the old versions just using the 32-bit syscalls (or otherwise
> translating between conventions, but using the 32-bit syscalls is the
> simplest approach)? I see no need to break compatibility with existing
> As I noted in
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2006-05/msg00020.html>, at that time
> the value of RLIM64_INFINITY for o32/n32 was purely a glibc convention the
> kernel didn't see at all. It's only with the use of newer syscalls that
> this glibc convention is any sort of problem.
Why not just make them convert any value >= 0x7fffffffffffffff to
infinity before making the syscall? There's certainly no meaningful
use for finite values in that range...