On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Łukasz Sowa <luksow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Will, > > That's very different approach to the system call interposition problem. > I find you solution very interesting. It gives far more capabilities > than my syscalls cgroup that you commented on some time ago. It's ready > now but I haven't tried filtering yet. I think that if your solution > make it to the mainline (and I guess that's really possible at current > stage :)), there will be no place for mine solution but that's ok. Yeah - there've been so many tries, I'll be happy when one makes it in which is usable :) > There's one thing that I'm curious about - have you measured overhead in > any way? That was one of the biggest issues in all previous attempts to > limit syscalls. I'd love to compare the numbers with mine solution. Certainly. I have some rough numbers, but nothing I'd call strong measurements. There is still a fair amount of cost due to the syscall slow path. > I'll examine your patch later on and put some comments if I bump into > something. Much appreciated - cheers! will -- 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
