shared memory, mmap not recommended?

[Peter . Ronnquist]

Hello,

In a recent posting Linus Torvalds mentioned
(http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=97598683318724&w=2) :

> (otherwise I'll just end up disabling shared mmap - I doubt anybody really
uses it anyway, but it would be more polite to just support it).

I was thinking about using mmap for shared mememory in my program, but now I
am reconsidering. 
Is the System V or Posix mechanism for shared memory a better(it will be
supported in 2.4) choice?

(I am not subscribed to the mailing list so please CC your eventual reply)

BR
Peter Rönnquist
Software Engineer
Nokia Home Communications
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

RE: shared memory, mmap not recommended?

[Peter . Ronnquist]

>   [Linus]
> > > (otherwise I'll just end up disabling shared mmap - I 
> doubt anybody
> > > really uses it anyway, but it would be more polite to just support
> > > it).
> 
> [Peter Rönnquist]
> > I was thinking about using mmap for shared mememory in my program,
> > but now I am reconsidering.  Is the System V or Posix mechanism for
> > shared memory a better(it will be supported in 2.4) choice?
> 
> [Peter Samuelson]
> Linus was talking about shared mmap on a file in an smbfs filesystem.
> Rather different from what you are talking about.  For regular shared
> memory, shared mmap should be OK if you actually need backing store
> (i.e. the state you are sharing is persistent).  Often this is not the
> case, in which case POSIX shm might be best.
> 

I see, thanks a lot for the clarification.

BR
Peter Rönnquist
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/