lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm,fork,security: introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK
From
Date
On 08/07/2017 08:23 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> If my thoughts above are correct, what about returning EINVAL if one
> attempts to set MADV_DONTFORK on mappings set up for sharing?

That's my preference as well. If there is a use case for shared or
non-anonymous mappings, then we can implement MADV_DONTFORK with the
semantics for this use case. If we pick some arbitrary semantics now,
without any use case, we might end up with something that's not actually
useful.

Thanks,
Florian

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-08 11:58    [W:0.127 / U:0.588 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site