On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Sun 17-09-17 19:39:45, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 08:44:14PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> > So it wasn't all that easy, and Linus declined to take it. I think we
>> > should add a new ->mmap_validate() file operation a
On Sun 17-09-17 19:39:45, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 08:44:14PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> > So it wasn't all that easy, and Linus declined to take it. I think we
> > should add a new ->mmap_validate() file operation and save the
> > tree-wide cleanup until later.
>
> Not
On Sat 16-09-17 20:44:14, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Mon 14-08-17 23:12:16, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
> >> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
>
On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 08:44:14PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> So it wasn't all that easy, and Linus declined to take it. I think we
> should add a new ->mmap_validate() file operation and save the
> tree-wide cleanup until later.
Note that we already have a mmap_capabilities callout for nommu,
I
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 14-08-17 23:12:16, Dan Williams wrote:
>> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
>> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
>> mechanism to define new behavior that is known to fai
Hi Dan,
[auto build test ERROR on linus/master]
[also build test ERROR on v4.13-rc5 next-20170816]
[if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help
improve the system]
url:
https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Dan-Williams/fs-xfs-introduce-S_IOMAP_SEALED/201
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Dan Williams
> wrote:
>> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
>> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
>> mechanism to define new behavior t
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:12 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
> mechanism to define new behavior that is known to fail on older kernels
> without the feature. Use
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Mon 14-08-17 23:12:16, Dan Williams wrote:
>> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
>> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
>> mechanism to define new behavior that is known to fai
On Mon 14-08-17 23:12:16, Dan Williams wrote:
> The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
> unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
> mechanism to define new behavior that is known to fail on older kernels
> without the feature. Use the fact
The mmap syscall suffers from the ABI anti-pattern of not validating
unknown flags. However, proposals like MAP_SYNC and MAP_DIRECT need a
mechanism to define new behavior that is known to fail on older kernels
without the feature. Use the fact that specifying MAP_SHARED and
MAP_PRIVATE at the same
11 matches
Mail list logo
