Hello, (2013/10/08 21:49), Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 5:42 AM, HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatay...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:+static unsigned long +get_unmapped_area_vmcore(struct file *filp, unsigned long addr, + unsigned long len, unsigned long pgoff, + unsigned long flags) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_MMU + return current->mm->get_unmapped_area(filp, addr, len, pgoff, flags); +#else + return -EIO; +#endif +} + static const struct file_operations proc_vmcore_operations = { .read = read_vmcore, .llseek = default_llseek, .mmap = mmap_vmcore, + .get_unmapped_area = get_unmapped_area_vmcore,I think current->mm->get_unmapped_area should be used by core proc code.
What do you actually suggest here? You mean moving this code in proc code? I don't think you suggest so.
ENOMEM bug looks unrelated though.
Next step I'll do is to look into vm_unmapped_region() that looks for for a region fit to a given mmap request and returns its address. In particular, I'll focus on when vm_unmapped_region() could return kernel-space address. -- Thanks. HATAYAMA, Daisuke -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
