From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
What _is_ inconsistent is kernel/sys.c's setpriority()/set_one_prio().
It checks current->euid|uid against p->uid, which makes little sense, but
is how we've been doing it ever since. It's a Linux quirk documented in
the manpage. To make things funnier, SuS requires current->euid|uid match
against p->euid.
The patch below fixes it (and brings the logic in line with what
setscheduler()/setaffinity() does), but if we do it then it should be done
only in 2.6.12 or later, after good exposure in -mm.
(Worst-case this could break an application but i highly doubt it: it at
most could deny renicing another task to positive (or in very rare cases,
to negative) nice values, which no application should crash on something
like that, normally.)
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
---
25-akpm/kernel/sys.c | 3 ++-
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN kernel/sys.c~sys_setpriority-euid-semantics-fix kernel/sys.c
--- 25/kernel/sys.c~sys_setpriority-euid-semantics-fix 2005-02-22 18:16:50.000000000 -0800
+++ 25-akpm/kernel/sys.c 2005-02-22 18:16:50.000000000 -0800
@@ -216,12 +216,13 @@ int unregister_reboot_notifier(struct no
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_reboot_notifier);
+
static int set_one_prio(struct task_struct *p, int niceval, int error)
{
int no_nice;
if (p->uid != current->euid &&
- p->uid != current->uid && !capable(CAP_SYS_NICE)) {
+ p->euid != current->euid && !capable(CAP_SYS_NICE)) {
error = -EPERM;
goto out;
}
_