Re: [PATCH 26/26] x86/mm: allow to have userspace mappings above 47-bits

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 02:25:08PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> >>> So if I have done a successful mmap which returned > 128TB what should a
> >>> following mmap(0,...) return ? Should that now search the *full* address
> >>> space or below 128TB ?
> >>
> >> No, I don't think so. And this implementation doesn't do this.
> >>
> >> It's safer this way: if an library can't handle high addresses, it's
> >> better not to switch it automagically to full address space if other part
> >> of the process requested high address.
> >>
> >
> > What is the epectation when the hint addr is below 128TB but addr + len >
> > 128TB ? Should such mmap request fail ?
> 
> Considering that we have stack at the top (around 128TB) we may not be
> able to get a free area for such a request. But I guess the idea here is
> that if hint address is below 128TB, we behave as though our TASK_SIZE
> is 128TB ? Is that correct ?

Right.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]
  Powered by Linux