Re: [PATCH] recognize MAP_LOCKED in mmap() call

From: Rik van Riel (
Date: Wed Sep 18 2002 - 14:39:48 EST

On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> >(SuS really only anticipates that mmap needs to look at prior mlocks
> >in force against the address range. It also says
> >
> > Process memory locking does apply to shared memory regions,
> >
> >and we don't do that either. I think we should; can't see why SuS
> >requires this.)
> Let me make sure I read what you said correctly. Does this mean that
> Linux 2.4 (or 2.5) kernels do not lock shared memory regions if a
> process uses mlockall?

But it does. Linux won't evict memory that's MLOCKed...



Spamtrap of the month:

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to More majordomo info at Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Sep 23 2002 - 22:00:24 EST