From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail190.messagelabs.com (mail190.messagelabs.com [216.82.249.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B6076B004D for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 00:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp ([10.0.50.75]) by fgwmail7.fujitsu.co.jp (Fujitsu Gateway) with ESMTP id n554nsTr024320 for (envelope-from kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com); Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:54 +0900 Received: from smail (m5 [127.0.0.1]) by outgoing.m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7879B45DE4F for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp [10.0.50.95]) by m5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569F545DE4E for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F1E31DB803C for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:54 +0900 (JST) Received: from m106.s.css.fujitsu.com (m106.s.css.fujitsu.com [10.249.87.106]) by s5.gw.fujitsu.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id C12DD1DB805E for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:50 +0900 (JST) From: KOSAKI Motohiro Subject: Re: [PATCH] - support inheritance of mlocks across fork/exec V2 In-Reply-To: <1244176757.11597.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1228331069.6693.73.camel@lts-notebook> <1244176757.11597.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-Id: <20090605134641.FC25.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:49:50 +0900 (JST) Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Jon Masters Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, Lee Schermerhorn , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel , Andrew Morton , riel@redhat.com, hugh@veritas.com List-ID: > On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 14:04 -0500, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > > Add support for mlockall(MCL_INHERIT|MCL_RECURSIVE): > > FWIW, I really liked this patch series. And I think there is still value > in a generic "mlock" wrapper utility that I can use. Sure, the later on > containers suggestions are all wonderful in theory but I don't see that > that went anywhere either (and I disagree that we can't trust people to > use this right without doing silly things) - if I'm really right that > this got dropped on the floor, can we resurrect it in .31 please? I guess Lee is really really busy now. Can you make V3 patch instead? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org