From owner-freebsd-current Mon Nov 15 14:27:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18D614E92 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 1999 14:27:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon@apollo.backplane.com) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id OAA45627; Mon, 15 Nov 1999 14:27:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 14:27:10 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <199911152227.OAA45627@apollo.backplane.com> To: Sean Eric Fagan Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PATCH for testing References: <199911152213.OAA20176@kithrup.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :I don't think this should go in at all. : :It increases the size of the proc structure (thereby affecting _all_ :processes) gratuitously. While I'm generally in favour of having the process :arguments kept around, the "BSD way" has been to only examine them in user :memory, despite that being unreliable and just annoying. : :The benefits are fairly minimal, and I don't believe justify the cost :incurred. If it weren't for 'setproctitle()' I would agree with you. But since setproctitle() exists we have a serious mess on our hands. Personally I would prefer to see it cleaned up as follows: * place a copy of the initial arguments in the struct proc as well as the uarea. * have the sysctl that limits the buffer size within the struct proc to something reasonable (e.g. 1K) but don't bother making 'ps' fall back to the uarea. Allow a value of '0' indicating 'unlimited' (i.e. really means ARGS_MAX). * setproctitle() messes with the struct proc only * ps, top, et all use the struct proc only And, also, we need to get rid of the 'e' option to ps entirely. It's a major security hole. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message