![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Andrew Morton wrote: > Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> wrote: > > > > No prize for guessing it was tmpfs I found the problem with. > > Yeah, the usual blot on the kernelscape. Now, now, tmpfs is there to keep you honest! > > Am I reading alloc_inode correctly, that the default it gives is > > an empty_aops with NULL readpage, but a backing_dev_info with non-0 > > ra_pages? How does your do_mmap_pgoff fare on a PROT_EXEC mapping > > of one of those mmaping device drivers? > > Probably explodes? I'm not particularly serious about that change - it > can be done in userspace. You mean, by MADV_WILLNEED...? > Is the do_mmap_pgoff() hack the only offender? If so it would be better to > localise the test in there too. No, it's not quite the only (see original comments): I've not tried it, but madvise_willneed (looks like it) suffers from the same assumption. Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:36 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||