[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 22:45:07 +0300
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Kees Cook <kees@...ntu.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] mm: restrict access to /proc/slabinfo
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
>> Having some aggregate number in /proc/meminfo would probably be fine.
>>
>> And yes, we probably should avoid giving page-level granularity in
>> /proc/meminfo too. Do it in megabytes instead. None of the information
>> there is really relevant at a page level, everybody just wants rough
>> aggregates.
>
> We have this in /proc/meminfo:
>
> Slab: 20012 kB
>
> Or did you mean something even more specific?
Oh, sorry, I completely misread what you wrote above. Sure, we can
round the numbers into megabytes without breaking the ABI.
Pekka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
