On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com wrote:

Andrew Morton wrote:

quoted

(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, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/