Skip to content

Commit 46329a9

Browse files
jtlaytonbrauner
authored andcommitted
acct(2): begin the deprecation of legacy BSD process accounting
As Christian points out [1], even though it's privileged, this interface has a lot of footguns. There are better options these days (e.g. eBPF), so it would be good to start discouraging its use and mark it as deprecated. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/20250212-giert-spannend-8893f1eaba7d@brauner/ Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260106-bsd-acct-v1-1-d15564b52c83@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
1 parent 6784f27 commit 46329a9

1 file changed

Lines changed: 5 additions & 2 deletions

File tree

init/Kconfig

Lines changed: 5 additions & 2 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -624,8 +624,9 @@ config SCHED_HW_PRESSURE
624624
arch_update_hw_pressure() and arch_scale_thermal_pressure().
625625

626626
config BSD_PROCESS_ACCT
627-
bool "BSD Process Accounting"
627+
bool "BSD Process Accounting (DEPRECATED)"
628628
depends on MULTIUSER
629+
default n
629630
help
630631
If you say Y here, a user level program will be able to instruct the
631632
kernel (via a special system call) to write process accounting
@@ -635,7 +636,9 @@ config BSD_PROCESS_ACCT
635636
command name, memory usage, controlling terminal etc. (the complete
636637
list is in the struct acct in <file:include/linux/acct.h>). It is
637638
up to the user level program to do useful things with this
638-
information. This is generally a good idea, so say Y.
639+
information. This mechanism is antiquated and has significant
640+
scalability issues. You probably want to use eBPF instead. Say
641+
N unless you really need this.
639642

640643
config BSD_PROCESS_ACCT_V3
641644
bool "BSD Process Accounting version 3 file format"

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)