|
@@ -133,41 +133,6 @@ Who: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
-What: sys_sysctl
|
|
|
-When: September 2010
|
|
|
-Option: CONFIG_SYSCTL_SYSCALL
|
|
|
-Why: The same information is available in a more convenient from
|
|
|
- /proc/sys, and none of the sysctl variables appear to be
|
|
|
- important performance wise.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- Binary sysctls are a long standing source of subtle kernel
|
|
|
- bugs and security issues.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- When I looked several months ago all I could find after
|
|
|
- searching several distributions were 5 user space programs and
|
|
|
- glibc (which falls back to /proc/sys) using this syscall.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- The man page for sysctl(2) documents it as unusable for user
|
|
|
- space programs.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- sysctl(2) is not generally ABI compatible to a 32bit user
|
|
|
- space application on a 64bit and a 32bit kernel.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- For the last several months the policy has been no new binary
|
|
|
- sysctls and no one has put forward an argument to use them.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- Binary sysctls issues seem to keep happening appearing so
|
|
|
- properly deprecating them (with a warning to user space) and a
|
|
|
- 2 year grace warning period will mean eventually we can kill
|
|
|
- them and end the pain.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
- In the mean time individual binary sysctls can be dealt with
|
|
|
- in a piecewise fashion.
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-Who: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
----------------------------
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
What: /proc/<pid>/oom_adj
|
|
|
When: August 2012
|
|
|
Why: /proc/<pid>/oom_adj allows userspace to influence the oom killer's
|