Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU

2016-04-25 Thread Andrew Morton
; > > Subject: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU > > > > > > I take it that "ramfs" was intended here. > > > > They're two names for the same thing; I'm not sure which should be > > preferred. > > Or maybe not... the rela

Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU

2016-04-25 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 08:41:24PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:09:09PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:19:44 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU > >

Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU

2016-04-25 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:09:09PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:19:44 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > > > Subject: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU > > I take it that "ramfs" was intended here. They're two names for the same

Re: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU

2016-04-25 Thread Andrew Morton
On Fri, 22 Apr 2016 18:19:44 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > Subject: [PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU I take it that "ramfs" was intended here. > The nommu do_mmap expects f_op->get_unmapped_area to either succeed or > return -ENOSYS for VM_MAYSHARE (

[PATCH] tmpfs: fix VM_MAYSHARE mappings for NOMMU

2016-04-22 Thread Rich Felker
The nommu do_mmap expects f_op->get_unmapped_area to either succeed or return -ENOSYS for VM_MAYSHARE (e.g. private read-only) mappings. Returning addr in the non-MAP_SHARED case was completely wrong, and only happened to work because addr was 0. However, it prevented VM_MAYSHARE mappings from shar