Re: Change in functionality of futex() system call.

From: Joel Becker
Date: Tue Jun 07 2011 - 14:31:31 EST

On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 08:11:38PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le lundi 06 juin 2011 à 10:53 -0700, Darren Hart a écrit :
> >
> > If I understand the problem correctly, RO private mapping really doesn't
> > make any sense and we should probably explicitly not support it, while
> > special casing the RO shared mapping in support of David's scenario.
> >
> We supported them in 2.6.18 kernels, apparently. This might sounds
> stupid but who knows ?

Trying to come up with a strawman for this sort of operation.
What about a process that creates a private mapping and then creates
threads with CLONE_VM? Would we CoW in that case?



Pitchers and catchers report.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at