Kyle Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2005, at 12:24:50, Vincent W. Freeh wrote:
>> I guess I live in a different world. I do lots of things I'm not
>> "supposed" to do.
>
> So why are you complaining that it doesn't work? "Doctor, it hurts
> when I use my toes to hold a nail as I hammer it in!" "Well don't do
> that then!"
I'm not supposed to run linux on i386, ask Bill. Why do I do it then?
>> Moreover, it is very sensible and usable to mprotect malloc pages.
>
> DANGER! DANGER WILL ROBINSON! DANGER! malloc() is *NOT* guaranteed
> or even theoretically implemented to return pages.
If you allocate a block of 2*PAGESIZE-1 bytes, *any* allocation method is
*guaranteed* return at least one complete page. (BTW: The example from the
manpage is wrong since it does only make sure the starting address is on
the page, but not that the end of the protected memory is within the
allocated area. Whom should I contact?)
But even if Vincend makes the next malloc/free/whatever to be fubar,
or if he made the world explode, mprotect is still required to report
an error if the requested action failed. If it doesn't do that for
mprotecting _any_ range, no matter how strange it may be, it is broken.
--
Ich danke GMX dafür, die Verwendung meiner Adressen mittels per SPF
verbreiteten Lügen zu sabotieren.
-
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]
