On 12/14/2012 06:20 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 6:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: >> Wouldn't the vdso get mapped already and could be mremap()'d. If we > really need more control I'd almost push for a device/filesystem node > that could be mmapped the usual way. > > Hmm. That may work, but it'll still break ABI. I'm not sure that > criu is stable enough yet that we should care. Criu people?
It's not yet, but we'd still appreciate the criu-friendly vdso redesign. > (In brief summary: how annoying would it be if the vdso was no longer > just a bunch of constant bytes that lived somewhere?) It depends on what vdso is going to be. In the perfect case it should a) be mremap-able to any address (or be at fixed address _forever_, but I assume this is not feasible); b) have entry points at fixed (or somehow movable) places. I admit that I didn't understand your question properly, if I did, please correct me. Thanks, Pavel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/