On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > Almost. I would still prefer madvise_vma to allow MADV_DONTFORK > on a VM_IO vma, even though it must prohibit MADV_DOFORK there. > But if Linus disagrees, of course ignore me. No, I agree. Quite frankly, I'd be willing to allow even the other way around, because I don't see how the VM could screw up, but prohibiting DOFORK is clearly the safer thing to do. Linus - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>
- Re: Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- References:
- madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>
- Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [openib-general] Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>
- madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- Prev by Date: Re: OCFS2 Filesystem inconsistency across nodes
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 01/13] hrtimer: round up relative start time
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- Next by thread: Re: Re: madvise MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK
- Index(es):
 |