From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>
To: "Nick Piggin" <npiggin@suse.de>
Cc: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
mk <michael.kerrisk@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: MAP_POPULATE behavior change?
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 17:27:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <517f3f820805050827w4e880f94pfb19593f21d331b9@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080505125450.GB10312@wotan.suse.de>
[...]
> > > > Also, can you summarize the status of MAP_NONBLOCK? Is it now
> > > > a no-op?
> > >
> > > Yes, it is.
> >
> > Hmm -- going back and re-reading the code, there is:
> >
> > if ((flags & MAP_POPULATE) && !(flags & MAP_NONBLOCK))
> > make_pages_present(addr, addr + len);
> >
> > That means that MAP_NONBLOCK makes *MAP_POPULATE* a no-op.
> Was that intended?
>
>
> Ah, my logic wasn't up to scratch there. Yes of course MAP_NONBLOCK is not
> a noop, but it makes MAP_POPULATE into a noop. So it still guarantees
> that the call will not block and that the kernel will make some kind of
> best effort to populate the mapping... for some values of "some kind of"
> (ie. "nothing" ;)).
>
> It's done this way of course so it is still safe to call MAP_NONBLOCK if you
> don't want to block, and thus everything stays backwards and forward
> compatible.
Thanks.
Continuing on from there, what is the status of the flags argument for
remap_file_pages() now. the man page curently carries this text:
The flags argument has the same meaning as for mmap(2),
but all flags other than MAP_NONBLOCK are ignored.
My question is: is it still true that flags other than MAP_NONBLOCK
are ignored? A quick glance at the code leads me to suspect not.
(I'm not sure if you made the recent changes to that code or not?)
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-05 15:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-28 12:07 Michael Kerrisk
2008-05-05 12:23 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-05 12:42 ` Michael Kerrisk
2008-05-05 12:54 ` Nick Piggin
2008-05-05 15:27 ` Michael Kerrisk [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-04-22 13:16 Michael Kerrisk
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=517f3f820805050827w4e880f94pfb19593f21d331b9@mail.gmail.com \
--to=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael.kerrisk@gmail.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@googlemail.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®