[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200703220204.51146.maximlevitsky@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 02:04:50 +0200
From: Maxim <maximlevitsky@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] : Is /proc/kcore still usefull and/or maintained ?
On Thursday 22 March 2007 01:53:10 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I stand corrected : This is a new bug
>
> The /proc/kcore problem appears with linux-2.6.21-rc4-mm1
>
> fd = open("/proc/kcore", 0);
> llseek(fd, ...) returns an -EINVAL error
>
>
> Quick code inspection (before going to sleep...) shows that
>
> proc_reg_llseek() (file fs/proc/inode.c)
>
> is doing something like :
>
> rv = -EINVAL;
> llseek = pde->proc_fops->llseek;
> spin_unlock(&pde->pde_unload_lock);
> if (llseek)
> rv = llseek(file, offset, whence);
>
> As kcore dont have a .llseek handler, proc_reg_llseek() returns -EINVAL;
>
> Previous kernel was probably calling a default llseek() handler.
>
> if (!llseek)
> llseek = default_llseek;
>
> Hum ???
>
Hi,
Yes, you are right, you have different problem that I had
But why do you need llseek ?
Why not to mmap it ?
It is natural thing to do with files that represent memory.
Regards,
Maxim Levitsky
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists