Re: [PATCH] recognize MAP_LOCKED in mmap() call
Rik van Riel (riel@conectiva.com.br)
Wed, 18 Sep 2002 16:39:48 -0300 (BRT)
On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >(SuS really only anticipates that mmap needs to look at prior mlocks
> >in force against the address range. It also says
> >
> > Process memory locking does apply to shared memory regions,
> >
> >and we don't do that either. I think we should; can't see why SuS
> >requires this.)
>
> Let me make sure I read what you said correctly. Does this mean that
> Linux 2.4 (or 2.5) kernels do not lock shared memory regions if a
> process uses mlockall?
But it does. Linux won't evict memory that's MLOCKed...
cheers,
Rik
--
Spamtrap of the month: september@surriel.com
http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/
-
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/