On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 11:29:57AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 10:23:54 +0100 > Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > However, I like the mm->max_addr idea because that could be used > > > for the mmap()/munmap()/mremap() sanity checks as well instead of > > > bogus TASK_SIZE. > > > > Hmm, but in process context it is not bogus is it? > > I guess you're suggesting that there could be times when > mm->max_addr and the current thread's address space disposition > are out of sync?
No, i just think it's overkill for the simple task Paul wants it for. And in mmap/munmap you can just trust what TASK_SIZE tells you because it's in the correct process context. -Andi
