Quoting Serge E. Hallyn ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > Quoting Badari Pulavarty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 12:48 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:06:37 -0700 > > > Badari Pulavarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-06-07 at 12:43 -0400, Albert Cahalan wrote: > > > > > On 6/7/07, Badari Pulavarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > BTW, I agree with Eric that its would be nice to use shmid as part > > > > > > of name instead of forcing to be as inode number. It should be > > > > > > possible for pmap to workout shmid from "key" or name. Isn't it ? > > > > > > > > > > It is not at all nice. > > > > > > > > > > 1. it's incompatible ABI breakage > > > > > 2. where will you put the key then, in the inode? :-) > > > > > > > > Nope. Currently "key" is part of the name (but its not unique). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Changing to "SYSVID%d" is no good either. Look, people > > > > > are ***parsing*** this stuff in /proc. The /proc filesystem > > > > > is not some random sandbox to be playing in. > > > > > > > > > > Before you go messing with it, note that the device number > > > > > also matters. (it's per-boot dynamic, but that's OK) > > > > > That's how one knows that /SYSV00000000 is not just > > > > > a regular file; sadly these didn't get a non-/ prefix. > > > > > (and no you can't fix that now; it's way too late) > > > > > > > > > > Next time you feel like breaking an ABI, mind putting > > > > > "LET'S BREAK AN ABI!" in the subject of your email? > > > > > > > > I am not breaking ABI. Its already broken in the current > > > > mainline. I am trying to fix it by putting back the ino# > > > > as shmid. Eric had a suggestion that, instead of depending > > > > on the inode# to be shmid, we could embed shmid into name > > > > (instead of "key" which is currently not unique). > > > > > > > > > BTW, I suspect this kind of thing also breaks: > > > > > a. fuser, lsof, and other resource usage display tools > > > > > b. various obscure emulators (similar to valgrind) > > > > > > > > If you strongly feel that "old" behaviour needs to be retained, > > > > > > yup, we should put it back. The change was, afaik, accidental. > > > > > > > here is the patch I originally suggested. > > > > > > Confused. Will this one-liner fix all the userspace breakage to which > > > Albert refers? > > > > Yes. Albert, please correct me if I am wrong. > > It will, but could lead to two different inodes with the same i_ino, > right?
Well I guess it's not *technically* a problem since these inodes are never hashed. -serge - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
