On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 23:27:08 +0200,
Waiman Long wrote:
>
> On 06/08/2018 05:16 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 15:49:49 +0200 Takashi Iwai <ti...@suse.de> wrote:
> >
> >> Currently shmmni proc entry accepts all entered integer values, but
> >> the practical limit is IPCMNI (32768). This confuses user as if a
> >> bigger value were accepted but not applied correctly.
> >>
> >> This patch changes the proc entry to use *_minmax variant to limit the
> >> accepted values accordingly.
> > Waiman Long was working on a (vastly more complicated) patchset to
> > address this.
> >
> >> --- a/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
> >> +++ b/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
> >> @@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ static int proc_ipc_auto_msgmni(struct ctl_table *table,
> >> int write,
> >> static int zero;
> >> static int one = 1;
> >> static int int_max = INT_MAX;
> >> +static int ipcmni = IPCMNI;
> >>
> >> static struct ctl_table ipc_kern_table[] = {
> >> {
> >> @@ -120,7 +121,9 @@ static struct ctl_table ipc_kern_table[] = {
> >> .data = &init_ipc_ns.shm_ctlmni,
> >> .maxlen = sizeof(init_ipc_ns.shm_ctlmni),
> >> .mode = 0644,
> >> - .proc_handler = proc_ipc_dointvec,
> >> + .proc_handler = proc_ipc_dointvec_minmax,
> >> + .extra1 = &zero,
> >> + .extra2 = &ipcmni,
> >> },
> >> {
> >> .procname = "shm_rmid_forced",
> > What is the back-compatibility situation here?
> >
> >
> Sorry for the late reply. I am planning to send out an updated patch
> once the merge window is closed. The latest patch can be found in
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/5/7/666
>
> Luis has some concern about the use of __read_mostly tag which I am
> going to remove in the next version.
Thanks, that's as trivial as my patch, unsurprisingly :)
Takashi
