On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 11:18:08AM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: >> With some programs the 2.6 kernel can end up allocating memory >> at address zero, for a non-MAP_FIXED mmap call! This causes >> problems with some programs and is generally rude to do. This >> simple patch fixes the problem in my tests. >> Make sure that we don't allocate memory all the way down to zero, >> so the NULL pointer never gets covered up with anonymous memory >> and we don't end up violating the C standard. >> Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:25:38AM -0800, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > SHLIB_BASE does not appear to be present in 2.6.9; perhaps something > else is going on. > I think we are better off: > (a) checking for hitting zero explicitly as opposed to > enforcing a randomly-chosen lower limit for addresses > (b) enforcing vma allocation above FIRST_USER_PGD_NR*PGDIR_SIZE, > to which SHLIB_BASE bears no relation. There's a long discussion here, in which no one appears to have noticed that SHLIB_BASE does not exist in mainline. Is anyone else awake here? -- wli - 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/
