Re: [PATCH] Fix up MADV_DONTFORK/MADV_DOFORK definitions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 10:34:48PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote:

   Andrew> yes, please do.

OK, here's a patch that changes them to 9 and 10.  I would hold off
sending this to Linus until Michael has a chance to speak up, in case
there's a reason I don't know for choosing 0x30 and 0x31.


Here
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=113162971606408&w=2
at the end there is a reasoning.

Well it may make userspace portability slightly easier for this
one case (exactly how, I'm not so sure because each architecture
has their own MADV_ defines anyway). I rather think this should
be left up to arch maintainers' numbering schemes, but...

So I think 9 and 10 will do too.

s/too// ?

0x30 and 0x31 broke parisc's numbering scheme.

By the way Nick was on CC list back than and haven't raised any concerns :)


I probably would have assumed it had gone past arch maintainers
and so wouldn't have given it a second thought: I don't know a
great deal about the issues here. I just now happened to see the
parisc comment.

But no harm done this time.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -
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]
  Powered by Linux