[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1MlcRe-0005sc-8p@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 07:43:46 +0200
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
CC: miklos@...redi.hu, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk, matthew@....cx, agruen@...e.de,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, hch@....de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] vfs: no "(unreachable)" prefix for SYSVIPC maps in
/proc/PID/maps
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 17:21:49 +0200
> Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
> > Another fix for vfs-fix-d_path-for-unreachable-paths.patch in -mm.
> >
>
> Now I'm confused.
>
> > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
> >
> > The patch
> >
> > "vfs: fix d_path() for unreachable paths"
> >
> > generally changed d_path() to report unreachable paths with a special
> > prefix. This has an effect on /proc/${PID}/maps as well for memory
> > maps set up with shmem_file_setup() or hugetlb_file_setup(). These
> > functions set up unlinked files under a kernel-private vfsmount.
> > Since this vfsmount is unreachable from userspace, these maps will be
> > reported with the "(unreachable)" prefix.
> >
> > This is undesirable, because it changes the kernel ABI and might break
> > applications for no good reason.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...e.cz>
>
> These three patches are fixes against
> vfs-fix-d_path-for-unreachable-paths.patch?
Yes. They apply even without that patch, but don't make any sense...
Sorry about the confusion :(
Thanks,
Miklos
--
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