[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: page->mapping == 0

On Sun, 29 Oct 2000, Alan Cox wrote:

> > I would expect problems with truncate, mmap, rename, POSIX locks, fasync,
> > ptrace and mount go unnoticed for _long_. Ditto for parts of procfs
> Well the ptrace one still has mysteriously breaks usermode linux against it
> on my list here. Was that ever explained. It looked like the stack got corrupted
> which is weird.

Alan, is it me or usermode port really tends to catch the stack overflows?
<thinks> How about we allocate the pages by 4, not by 2 as we do now, and
explicitly unmap the pages below the task_struct? That would still leave the
chance of stack overflow going unnoticed, but the window would be limited.

Another possibility for ptrace-related screwups: past-the-EOF check in
filemap_nopage(). I'm still not convinced that it's right. It may be, but...

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.052 / U:2.280 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site