On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 12:36 +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven writes:
> > > mmap(0, 4096, PROT_READ|PROT_EXEC|PROT_WRITE,
> > > MAP_FIXED|MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, 0, 0);
> > > struct s *bar = 0;
> >
> > the question isn't if it's a good idea to allow mmap(0) but to allow
> > mmap PROT_WRITE | PROT_EXEC !
>
> It is if you want JITs, code loaders, virtualisation engines, etc
> to continue working.
yeah I know we can't forbid it point blank
(having said that, on architectures where I and D cache aren't coherent
(and there are many, including ia64), most of these are buggy anyway;
the sane ones actually do an mprotect between writing and executing, so
that the kernel can take care of the cache coherency properly)
--
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.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]
