Re: mprotect abuse in slim

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Pekka Enberg (penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx):
> On 1/10/07, Serge E. Hallyn <serue@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >But since it looks like you just munmap the region now, shouldn't a
> >subsequent munmap by the app just return -EINVAL?  that seems appropriate
> >to me.
> 
> Applications don't know about revoke and neither should they.
> Therefore close(2) and munmap(2) must work the same way they would for
> non-revoked inodes so that applications can release resources
> properly.
> 
>                                         Pekka

Right, but is returning -EINVAL to userspace on munmap a problem?
It may not have been expected before, but it shouldn't break
anything...

Thanks for the tw other patches - I'll give them a shot and check
out current munmap behavior just as soon as I get a chance.

thanks,
-serge

-
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/