On Llu, 2005-12-19 at 11:38 -0700, Zan Lynx wrote:
> How about clearing MCL_FUTURE on fork but allow exec to inherit it?
> That way a parent process could fork, mlockall in the child and exec a
> memlocked child. A regular fork,exec by a memlocked parent would not
> create a memlocked child.
>
> Seems less messy than a new flag, while keeping the benefits.
The behaviour of MCL_FUTURE is standards defined so we don't get to
change it. The behaviour of an added flag is up to us.
-
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]
