Re: can we make anonymous memory non-EXECUTABLE?

Albert D. Cahalan (acahalan@cs.uml.edu)
Tue, 8 Jan 2002 14:32:41 -0500 (EST)


David Mosberger writes:

> I think that's fine. If the consensus is that apps *should* use
> mprotect() to get executable permission (Linus implied as much) and
> it's an architecture specific choice as to whether this is enforced,
> I'm happy. My belief is that we could make this change on ia64
> without undue burden on programmers. If not, I'm sure I'll find out
> about it and I'm willing to take the responsibility.

If you turn off executable permission right now, you can add it
back at some future date.

If you leave the executable permission, we're stuck with it as
the ABI becomes set in stone.

So turn it off ASAP.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/