[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171206045433.GQ26021@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 20:54:35 -0800
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 03:51:44PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz> writes:
>
> > Hi!
> >> > MAP_FIXED_UNIQUE
> >> > MAP_FIXED_ONCE
> >> > MAP_FIXED_FRESH
> >>
> >> Well, I can open a poll for the best name, but none of those you are
> >> proposing sound much better to me. Yeah, naming sucks...
> >
> > Given that MAP_FIXED replaces the previous mapping MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE
> > would probably be a best fit.
>
> Yeah that could work.
>
> I prefer "no clobber" as I just suggested, because the existing
> MAP_FIXED doesn't politely "replace" a mapping, it destroys the current
> one - which you or another thread may be using - and clobbers it with
> the new one.
It's longer than MAP_FIXED_WEAK :-P
You'd have to be pretty darn strong to clobber an existing mapping.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists