On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Mel Gorman <mel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > They might result in the same system call but one of them creates > the file under /dev/shm which should not have the same permissions > problem. The library really appears to want to create a shared > executable object, using shm_open does not appear that unreasonable > to me. People do use shm_open. Some systems mount /dev/shm with noexec. That's why we're here in the first place. > Which then needs to be copied in each distro wanting to do the same > thing and is not backwards compatible where as using shm_open is. Each distro wanting to set noexec on its /dev/shm mounts has to set the sysctl (or its default in their kernel builds), yes. Otherwise they are not compatible with the expectation of using PROT_EXEC on files opened with shm_open. Thanks, Roland -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>