lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: mlock(1)
* Chris Friesen (cfriesen@nortelnetworks.com) wrote:
> Chris Wright wrote:
>
> > 2. Problem is the execve(2) that the mlock(1) program would have to call.
> > This blows away the mappings which contain the locking info.
>
> Does it? The man page said it isn't inherited on fork(), but why wouldn't it
> be inherited on exec()?

The info is stored in the memory mapping info that's necessarily blown
away at execve(2) because that's where you are overlaying a new image.

thanks,
-chris
--
Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
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 14:06    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site