[Devel] Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] ipc: add sysctl to specify desired next object id

[Andrew Morton]

On Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:35:09 +0400
Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky at parallels.com> wrote:

> This patch adds 3 new variables and sysctls to tune them (by one "next_id"
> variable for messages, semaphores and shared memory respectively).
> This variable can be used to set desired id for next allocated IPC object.
> By default it's equal to -1 and old behaviour is preserved.
> If this variable is non-negative, then desired idr will be extracted from it
> and used as a start value to search for free IDR slot.
> 
> Notes:
> 1) this patch doesn't garantee, that new object will have desired id. So it's
> up to user space how to handle new object with wrong id.
> 2) After sucessfull id allocation attempt, "next_id" will be set back to -1
> (if it was non-negative).
> 
> --- a/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
> +++ b/ipc/ipc_sysctl.c
> @@ -158,6 +158,7 @@ static int proc_ipcauto_dointvec_minmax(ctl_table *table, int write,
>  
>  static int zero;
>  static int one = 1;
> +static int int_max = INT_MAX;
>  
>  static struct ctl_table ipc_kern_table[] = {
>  	{
> @@ -227,6 +228,33 @@ static struct ctl_table ipc_kern_table[] = {
>  		.extra1		= &zero,
>  		.extra2		= &one,
>  	},
> +	{
> +		.procname	= "sem_next_id",
> +		.data		= &init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_SEM_IDS].next_id,
> +		.maxlen		= sizeof(init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_SEM_IDS].next_id),
> +		.mode		= 0644,
> +		.proc_handler	= proc_ipc_dointvec_minmax,
> +		.extra1		= &zero,
> +		.extra2		= &int_max,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.procname	= "msg_next_id",
> +		.data		= &init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_MSG_IDS].next_id,
> +		.maxlen		= sizeof(init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_MSG_IDS].next_id),
> +		.mode		= 0644,
> +		.proc_handler	= proc_ipc_dointvec_minmax,
> +		.extra1		= &zero,
> +		.extra2		= &int_max,
> +	},
> +	{
> +		.procname	= "shm_next_id",
> +		.data		= &init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_SHM_IDS].next_id,
> +		.maxlen		= sizeof(init_ipc_ns.ids[IPC_SHM_IDS].next_id),
> +		.mode		= 0644,
> +		.proc_handler	= proc_ipc_dointvec_minmax,
> +		.extra1		= &zero,
> +		.extra2		= &int_max,
> +	},
>  	{}
>  };

ipc_kern_table[] is (badly) documented in
Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt.  Can we at least mention these
controls in there?  Better, create a new way of properly documenting
each control and document these three in that manner?  Better still,
document all the other ones as well ;)

The patch adds these controls to CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE=n kernels. 
Why is this?