right, sorry, I forgot to try strace. let me see what I can do.
On 4/21/06, Chris Wright <[email protected]> wrote:
> * David Wilk ([email protected]) wrote:
> > Ok, on my first test system (lowest amount of ram) a 2.6.16.9 kernel
> > patched with the patch you provided works fine. I'll throw it on some
> > other systems and we'll see how it does.
>
> Was that same (lowest amount of ram) system failing before Hugh's patch
> with vanilla 2.6.16.9? What we're looking for is to see if the app
> was doing:
>
> 1) shmget(0444) [RDONLY], shmat(SHM_RDONLY), mprotect(PROT_WRITE)
> or
> 2) shmget(0666) [RDWR], shmat(SHM_RDONLY), mprotect(PROT_WRITE)
>
> The first is definitely a bug, and that's what the original patch
> was closing. The second is technically (as in POSIX) undefined, and
> the original patch treated it as a bug as well. Hugh's additional
> patch allows this behaviour, as it's vaguely similar to open(RDWR),
> mmap(PROT_READ), mprotect(PROT_WRITE), which is legitimate. So we're
> trying to determine if that's what your app is doing. strace output
> may be unwieldy, but that (or using syscall audit) would be helpful
> to clarify.
>
> thanks,
> -chris
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
