lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86_64: Implement personality ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 05:44:31AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 12:25:52 +0300
> "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 10:02:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
> > >
> > > > - /* for MAP_32BIT mappings we force the legact mmap base
> > > > */
> > > > - if (!test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32) && (flags & MAP_32BIT))
> > > > + /* for MAP_32BIT mappings and ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT
> > > > personality we force the
> > > > + * legact mmap base
> > > > + */
> > >
> > > please use the customary multi-line comment style:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * Comment .....
> > > * ...... goes here:
> > > */
> > >
> > > and you might use the opportunity to fix the s/legact/legacy typo
> > > as well.
> >
> > Ok, I'll fix it.
> >
> > >
> > > but more generally, we already have ADDR_LIMIT_3GB support on x86.
> >
> > Does ADDR_LIMIT_3GB really work?
>
> if it's broken we should fix it.... not invent a new one.
> Also, traditionally often personalities only start at exec() time iirc.
> (but I could be wrong on that)

What is difference beetween ADDR_LIMIT_3GB and ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT? Probably,
I implement ADDR_LIMIT_3GB, not ADDR_LIMIT_32BIT...

--
Regards, Kirill A. Shutemov
+ Belarus, Minsk
+ ALT Linux Team, http://www.altlinux.com/
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-03 15:01    [W:0.094 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site