[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAG48ez0AAtzdQJPdW8sqj+mvYLdZezDe3x-_XgSvaN3ZwE=5GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 18:52:46 -0700
From: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk-manpages <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
linux-man@...r.kernel.org,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [patch] mremap.2: Add description of old_size == 0 functionality
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
[...]
> A recent change was made to mremap so that an attempt to create a
> duplicate a private mapping will fail.
>
> commit dba58d3b8c5045ad89c1c95d33d01451e3964db7
> Author: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
> Date: Wed Sep 6 16:20:55 2017 -0700
>
> mm/mremap: fail map duplication attempts for private mappings
>
> This return code is also documented here.
[...]
> diff --git a/man2/mremap.2 b/man2/mremap.2
[...]
> @@ -174,7 +189,12 @@ and
> or
> .B MREMAP_FIXED
> was specified without also specifying
> -.BR MREMAP_MAYMOVE .
> +.BR MREMAP_MAYMOVE ;
> +or \fIold_size\fP was zero and \fIold_address\fP does not refer to a
> +private anonymous mapping;
Shouldn't this be the other way around? "or old_size was zero and
old_address refers to a private anonymous mapping"?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists