Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE
From: Michal Hocko <hidden>
Date: 2017-12-06 09:08:18
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml
From: Michal Hocko <hidden>
Date: 2017-12-06 09:08:18
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-mm, lkml
On Wed 06-12-17 08:33:37, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
On 2017-12-06 05:50, Michael Ellerman wrote:quoted
Michal Hocko [off-list ref] writes:quoted
On Wed 29-11-17 14:25:36, Kees Cook wrote: It is safe in a sense it doesn't perform any address space dangerous operations. mmap is _inherently_ about the address space so the context should be kind of clear.So now you have to define what "dangerous" means.quoted
quoted
MAP_FIXED_UNIQUE MAP_FIXED_ONCE MAP_FIXED_FRESHWell, I can open a poll for the best name, but none of those you are proposing sound much better to me. Yeah, naming sucks...I also don't like the _SAFE name - MAP_FIXED in itself isn't unsafe [1], but I do agree that having a way to avoid clobbering (parts of) an existing mapping is quite useful. Since we're bikeshedding names, how about MAP_FIXED_EXCL, in analogy with the O_ flag.
I really give up on the name discussion. I will take whatever the majority comes up with. I just do not want this (useful) funtionality get bikeched to death. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs