Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm,fork,security: introduce MADV_WIPEONFORK | From | Florian Weimer <> | Date | Fri, 11 Aug 2017 16:11:44 +0200 |
| |
On 08/11/2017 04:06 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> I am sorry to look too insisting here (I have still hard time to reconcile > myself with the madvise (ab)use) but if we in fact want minherit like > interface why don't we simply add minherit and make the code which wants > to use that interface easier to port? Is the only reason that hooking > into madvise is less code? If yes is that a sufficient reason to justify > the (ab)use of madvise? If there is a general consensus on that part I > will shut up and won't object anymore. Arguably MADV_DONTFORK would fit > into minherit API better as well.
It does, OpenBSD calls it MAP_INHERIT_NONE.
Could you implement MAP_INHERIT_COPY and MAP_INHERIT_SHARE as well? Or is changing from MAP_SHARED to MAP_PRIVATE and back impossible?
Thanks, Florian
| |