On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > What's wrong with cacheflush(addr, count, which) that actually checks if > > <addr; addr+count> lies within the caller's address space before > > performing the flush and returns -EPERM otherwise? It would make the > > caller crawl like a turtle if it wished to but it would leave other > > processes alone. > > cacheflush(2) actually is supposed to handle things that way. Didn't I write it clearly-enough? ;-) -- + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + +--------------------------------------------------------------+ + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +
