Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jan 2003 00:15:46 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: recent change to exit_mmap |
| |
David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> wrote: > > I don't know why SET_PERSONALITY() came to be where it is now, but it > does make some sense to me. One thing that comes to mind: on ia64, we > normally don't map data segments with execute permission but for > backwards-compatibility, we need to do that for x86 binaries. I think > there might be a problem with that if SET_PERSONALITY() was done too > late. Certainly something that could be fixed, but I suspect a > similar ordering issue (perhaps on SPARC?) might have triggered the > current placement of SET_PERSONALITY(). >
hmm. Seems that all the activities between the two first SET_PERSONALITY() calls and the flush_old_exec() are pretty innocuous. And no mappings could be set up there, because flush_old_exec() would remove them again.
I'll ask Dave about it.
- 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/
| |