Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 5 Aug 2005 10:10:13 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: Bugs on your remap_file_pages protections implementations |
| |
* Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it> wrote:
> Hi Ingo, I'm the young UML hacker you met at OLS and who got your UML > patches sent ;-) > > I've been studying your patch (and the whole Linux VM, indeed) in the > past days, and I have some remarks, about the version of the code in > 2.6.4-rc2-mm1 (which is the same you sent me) - I've now downloaded > the version dropped from 2.6.5-mm1, but it doesn't seem to address > those problems. > > Btw, I've now seen why that patch was dropped, but not why it wasn't > resubmit.
was not resubmitted due to me only having 30 hours available to hack, per day ;) Feel free to pick the patch up.
> *) with your patch, remapped pages without MAP_INHERIT are IMHO not > safe across swapout; re-swapping them in will pass through the > arch-specific fault handler, which will check VMA's protections, and > fail if the VMA originally had MAP_NONE. Or am I missing something?
not sure, was a long time ago. I have checked swap-safeness, but only once. UML did work though, but i dont think i ever pushed it into swapping out its RAM-file.
Ingo - 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/
| |