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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <deb952d9-82bc-e737-8060-8fe7e70f44a1@nvidia.com> Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 13:21:25 -0800 From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com> To: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz> CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>, linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mmap.2: MAP_FIXED updated documentation On 12/06/2017 02:01 AM, Cyril Hrubis wrote: > Hi! >> (It does seem unfortunate that the man page cannot help the programmer >> actually write correct code here. He or she is forced to read the kernel >> implementation, in order to figure out the true alignment rules. I was >> hoping we could avoid that.) > > It would be nice if we had this information exported somehere so that we > do not have to rely on per-architecture ifdefs. > > What about adding MapAligment or something similar to the /proc/meminfo? > What's the use case you envision for that? I don't see how that would be better than using SHMLBA, which is available at compiler time. Because unless someone expects to be able to run an app that was compiled for Arch X, on Arch Y (surely that's not requirement here?), I don't see how the run-time check is any better. Or maybe you're thinking that since the SHMLBA cannot be put in the man pages, we could instead provide MapAlignment as sort of a different way to document the requirement? -- thanks, John Hubbard NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists