From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261260AbVBFSEf (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:04:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261265AbVBFSEe (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:04:34 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:19882 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261260AbVBFSEV (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Feb 2005 13:04:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 10:04:04 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Arjan van de Ven cc: Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , Christoph Hellwig , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drepper@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL/PATCH] Remove PT_GNU_STACK support before 2.6.11 In-Reply-To: <1107711569.22680.146.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Message-ID: References: <20050206120244.GA28061@elte.hu> <20050206124523.GA762@elte.hu> <20050206125002.GF30109@wotan.suse.de> <1107694800.22680.90.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20050206130152.GH30109@wotan.suse.de> <20050206130650.GA32015@infradead.org> <20050206131130.GJ30109@wotan.suse.de> <20050206133239.GA4483@elte.hu> <20050206134640.GB30476@wotan.suse.de> <20050206140802.GA6323@elte.hu> <20050206142936.GC30476@wotan.suse.de> <1107710023.22680.138.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1107711569.22680.146.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 6 Feb 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > And if you want to split things up, there's at least three flags there: > > "stack" vs "file mapping" vs "anonymous mapping". For example, it might > > lets add "brk" as 4th I guess. I thought about that, but no normal user program uses brk() natively. They all just use "malloc()" and friends, and pretty much every implementation of those in turn just mixes brk/anon-mmap freely. > Ok so what to do for 2.6.11... the setarch workaround is there; that > works. My patch patches the worst issues and is quite minimal. What you > propose will be more invasive and more suitable for 2.6.11-bk1... > I can do such a patch no problem (although the next two days I won't > have time). Hmm.. I can take your initial patch now. Can somebody explain why this hassn't come up before, though? Linus