Bug 133460 - setrlimit/getrlimit should be per-process, not per-thread
Summary: setrlimit/getrlimit should be per-process, not per-thread
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: kernel
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Roland McGrath
QA Contact: Brian Brock
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 142791
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2004-09-24 07:07 UTC by Roland McGrath
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:10 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2005-01-03 08:31:46 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
test program for multithreaded behavior of setrlimit (934 bytes, text/plain)
2004-09-24 07:08 UTC, Roland McGrath
no flags Details
patch vs 2.6.9-rc2-bk9 to fix the behavior (46.20 KB, patch)
2004-09-24 08:01 UTC, Roland McGrath
no flags Details | Diff

Description Roland McGrath 2004-09-24 07:07:12 UTC
Description of problem:

POSIX specifies that 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
2.6.9-rc2

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Compile attached program with -lpthread.
2. Run it.  See it writes 3 bytes.
3. Realize it should have died with SIGXFSZ.
  
Actual results:
no SIGXFSZ

Expected results:
killed by SIGXFSZ

Additional info:
Fix on the way.

Comment 1 Roland McGrath 2004-09-24 07:08:45 UTC
Created attachment 104249 [details]
test program for multithreaded behavior of setrlimit

gcc -g -o mt-rlimit mt-rlimit.c -lpthread

Run with some args, demonstrates the single-threaded case and dies with
SIGXFSZ.
Run with no args, demonstrates the multi-threaded case and only dies with
SIGXFSZ if the kernel is fixed.

Comment 2 Roland McGrath 2004-09-24 08:01:17 UTC
Created attachment 104251 [details]
patch vs 2.6.9-rc2-bk9 to fix the behavior

I've submitted this patch upstream, waiting for feedback.

Comment 3 Roland McGrath 2004-10-20 06:13:55 UTC
This patch has gone in upstream, after 2.6.9; hopefully in 2.6.10 release.

Comment 4 Roland McGrath 2005-01-03 08:31:46 UTC
2.6.10 has this fixed.  Only the RLIMIT_CPU behavior is not quite correct,
everything else should be right now.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.