On 6/13/2010 15:52, Samuel J. Greear wrote:
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Antonio Huete Jimenez
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
As it is not really implemented I think ENOSYS is more appropiate. But
definitely the best thing at all is to implemented it :P
Cheers,
Antonio Huete
2010/6/13 Matthew Dillon<[email protected]>:
:>> ./t_ml
:> mlockall: Function not implemented
:
:Is it worth MFC'ing? I have a vague feeling I had talked to someone about
:this before, but I can't find evidence of it.
What direction are we talking about? Making it return ENOSYS or
making it return success but otherwise be a NOP ?
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<[email protected]>
--
Cheers,
Antonio Huete
Returning ENOSYS is correct as per the specification.
The mlockall() and munlockall() functions will fail if:
[ENOSYS]
The implementation does not support this memory locking interface.
See: http://opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/mlockall.html
Yeah, well, that's SUSv2...
However, see the change history here:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/mlockall.html
Sascha
