From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 16:59:03 -0500 From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: Re: [patch] remove hugetlb syscalls Message-ID: <20021114165903.F20258@redhat.com> References: <20021113184555.B10889@redhat.com> <20021114203035.GF22031@holomorphy.com> <20021114154809.D20258@redhat.com> <20021114210220.GM23425@holomorphy.com> <20021114161134.E20258@redhat.com> <3DD41849.20306@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3DD41849.20306@unix-os.sc.intel.com>; from rseth@unix-os.sc.intel.com on Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:40:25PM -0800 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Rohit Seth Cc: William Lee Irwin III , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:40:25PM -0800, Rohit Seth wrote: > Strictly speaking user don't have to be root. Currently the syscall > only requires users to have root as one of the supplementary groups (and > that is how Oracle is actually using these syscalls). And if > CAP_IPC_LOCK (to make it coherent with fs side of the world) is what is > preferdto provide access to hugepages then that change is simple also. > Don't need to do any chmod. Chmod is easier to administor (the special permissions are obvious with a standard tool called ls), and doesn't require giving random apps root privs (good practice still dictates that database backends should not have root). Capabilities would work, but have yet to catch on in any real sense and are lacking in terms of useful tools in most distributions. -ben -- "Do you seek knowledge in time travel?" -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/