On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 10:24:40AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > On 09/10/2014 08:47 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: > > That site should have checked PROT_NONE but it can't be the same bug > > that trinity is seeing. Minimally trinity is unaware of MPOL_MF_LAZY > > according to git grep of the trinity source. > > Actually, if I'm reading it correctly I think that Trinity handles mbind() > calls wrong. It passes the wrong values for mode flags and actual flags. Ugh, I think you're right. I misinterpreted the man page that mentions that flags like MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES/RELATIVE_NODES are OR'd with the mode, and instead dumped those flags into .. the flags field. So the 'flags' argument it generates is crap, because I didn't add any of the actual correct values. I'll fix it up, though if it's currently finding bugs, you might want to keep the current syscalls/mbind.c for now. Dave -- 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>