On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Hello Patrick,
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:04:11AM -0400, Patrick Donnelly wrote:
>> Hello Andrea,
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Andrea Arcangeli
>> wrote:
>> > This is an incremental update to the userfaultfd code in -mm.
>>
Hello Patrick,
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 11:04:11AM -0400, Patrick Donnelly wrote:
> Hello Andrea,
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> > This is an incremental update to the userfaultfd code in -mm.
>
> Sorry I'm late to this party. I'm curious how a ptrace monitor migh
Hello Andrea,
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> This is an incremental update to the userfaultfd code in -mm.
Sorry I'm late to this party. I'm curious how a ptrace monitor might
use a userfaultfd to handle faults in all of its tracees. Is this
possible without having ea
This is an incremental update to the userfaultfd code in -mm.
This fixes two bugs that could cause some malfunction (but nothing
that could cause memory corruption or kernel crashes of any sort,
neither in kernel nor userland).
This also introduces some enhancement: gdb now runs fine, signals can
