> obviously an AT_ARGMAX computed at execve time would be based on the rlimits > as well and if later userland changed the rlimits, it'd be userland's problem, > not that of the kernel (or the kernel could refuse a change that would violate > its earlier promise). This would thoroughly defeat the purpose of adding the thing. The only reason to have a new thing is so that userland does not have to mirror the kernel's policy (as it attempts to do now, with the 1/4 calculation). If the new thing is not something that userland can use consistently so as not to have to know what the kernel's actual policy is, then I don't see the point of it at all. > > auxv is only appropriate for things that > > are known at the time of the exec and won't change thereafter. > > you mean stuff like AT_EUID et al.? ;) The information that these give is about the conditions at startup. That's what they mean to userland, and userland only uses them to know the situation before it has made any calls. The definition of AT_EUID is "effective user ID at program startup", and that fact does not change. You proposed AT_ARGMAX for a purpose that requires knowing the current information in the process at the time it might attempt an execve call, not at startup. It is not an equivalent case. Thanks, Roland -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
