Re: mlock(1)

[Chris Wright]

* Chris Friesen (cfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> Chris Wright wrote:
> 
> > 2. Problem is the execve(2) that the mlock(1) program would have to call.
> > This blows away the mappings which contain the locking info.
> 
> Does it?  The man page said it isn't inherited on fork(), but why wouldn't it 
> be inherited on exec()?

The info is stored in the memory mapping info that's necessarily blown
away at execve(2) because that's where you are overlaying a new image.

thanks,
-chris
-- 
Linux Security Modules     http://lsm.immunix.org     http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/