[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0ca2620ce7534c5491e69416621ac41b@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:40:16 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Edward Napierala' <trasz@...ebsd.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
"John Hubbard" <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Abdul Haleem" <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"jasone@...gle.com" <jasone@...gle.com>,
"davidtgoldblatt@...il.com" <davidtgoldblatt@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE
From: Edward Napierala
> Sent: 14 December 2017 14:55
>
> On 1214T1415, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 14-12-17 12:44:17, Edward Napierala wrote:
> > > Regarding the name - how about adopting MAP_EXCL? It was introduced in
> > > FreeBSD,
> > > and seems to do exactly this; quoting mmap(2):
> > >
> > > MAP_FIXED Do not permit the system to select a different address
> > > than the one specified. If the specified address
> > > cannot be used, mmap() will fail. If MAP_FIXED is
> > > specified, addr must be a multiple of the page size.
> > > If MAP_EXCL is not specified, a successful MAP_FIXED
> > > request replaces any previous mappings for the
> > > process' pages in the range from addr to addr + len.
> > > In contrast, if MAP_EXCL is specified, the request
> > > will fail if a mapping already exists within the
> > > range.
> >
> > I am not familiar with the FreeBSD implementation but from the above it
> > looks like MAP_EXCL is a MAP_FIXED mofifier which is not how we are
> > going to implement it in linux due to reasons mentioned in this cover
> > letter. Using the same name would be more confusing than helpful I am
> > afraid.
>
> Sorry, missed that. Indeed, reusing a name with a different semantics
> would be a bad idea.
I don't remember any discussion about using MAP_FIXED | MAP_EXCL ?
Why not match the prior art??
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists