Andi Kleen wrote: > > It would be quite nice if it were safe to call read(), get EFAULT > > Even with that patch it is not safe, not even for write, because > it's racy. That's not necessarily a problem for the applications I described, because they can be made to only increase access in parallel with access; decreasing access can be synchronised over the whole program. But I agree with you, as no application should depend on such subtle details, which would probably be broken again in a future kernel anyway. -- Jamie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
