Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 27 Sep 1998 16:33:27 +0200 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: What's wrong with MAP_SHARED|MAP_ANONYMOUS? |
| |
On Sun, Sep 27, 1998 at 04:10:02PM +0200, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > Hello! > > > These mappings have a big advantage over anonymous mappings too - you > > can pass them around between processes using fd descriptor passing. > > How to prevent aggressive syncing dirty pages to disk for them? > They should make swap-like syncs to be useful.
True, it would be worth a mprotect() flag.
What I would like to see in 2.3 would be a special device works that hands out anonymous swap space associated with a fd (something like a combination of /dev/zero and a SVR4 clone device)
With that POSIX shared memory could be implemented in user space - using a daemon and access to the daemon's /proc/<pid>/fd/* files.
-Andi
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |