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    [W:0.018 / U:148.756 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site