Re: [PATCH] alpha: correct handling of negative *rlimit() args besides -1

[Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Oct 9, 2022 at 8:51 PM Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/7/22 22:45, Matt Turner via Libc-alpha wrote:
> > The generic version of RLIM_INFINITY in Linux is equal to (rlim_t)-1,
> > which is equal to ULLONG_MAX.  On alpha however it is instead defined as
> > 0x7ffffffffffffffful.  This was special-cased in 0d0bc78 [BZ #22648] but
> > it specifically used an equality check.
> >
> > There is a cpython test case test_prlimit_refcount which calls
> > setrlimit() with { -2, -2 } as arguments rather than the usual -1, it
> > therefore fails the equality test and is treated as a large arbitrary
> > positive value past the maximum of RLIM_INFINITY and fails with EPERM.
> > This patch changes the behavior of the *rlimit() calls to treat all
> > integers between 0x7ffffffffffffffful and (rlim_t)-1 as (rlim_t)-1,
> > i.e., RLIM_INFINITY.
> > ---
> >  sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/alpha/getrlimit64.c | 4 ++--
> >  sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/alpha/setrlimit64.c | 4 ++--
>
> Is MIPS affected by the same problem?

Looks to me like it is, but I don't have a mips system running to
confirm. If this patch is accepted, I'll send a follow-up for mips.