linux-kernel - Re : vm: weird behaviour when munmapping

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <38b2ab8a0611171301pe16229ch441ec24c538b1998@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:01:33 +0100
From:	"Francis Moreau" <francis.moro@...il.com>
To:	a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re : vm: weird behaviour when munmapping

[me moving to Gmail 'cause yahoo sucks !]

On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 14:12 +0000, moreau francis wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> The new object is the one allocated using:
>	new = kmem_cache_alloc(vm_area_cachep, SLAB_KERNEL);
>

Of course but at this point the choice of the new VMA is already made
by the caller. So in our case do_munmap() decided that B is the new
one as you said. But I still don't see why...

And as I said previously it will end up by calling consecutively:

        vma->vm_ops->open(B)
        vma->vm_ops->close(B)


> Please read Mel Gorman's book on memory management to gain a better
> understanding.
>
> http://www.phptr.com/bookstore/product.asp?isbn=0131453483&rl=1

thanks for the link, but I don't expect to find out the answer to this
very specific question in it.

Francis
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/