Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location

[William Lee Irwin III]

"Martin J. Bligh" <[e-mail]> writes:
>> Is there any good reason we can't remove TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE, and just shove
>> libraries directly above the program text? Red Hat seems to have patches to
>> dynamically tune it on a per-processes basis anyway ...

On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 11:54:56PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Yes. You won't get a continuous sbrk/brk heap then anymore. Not sure it is a 
> big problem though.
> But apparently Solaris/x86 is doing that.
> It's probably worth a sysctl at least.

How about a personality? It is a very slightly different ABI.

-- wli