On 6/7/07, Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So it looks to me like we need to do three things: - Fix the inode number - Fix the name on the hugetlbfs dentry to hold the key - Add a big fat comment that user space programs depend on this behavior of both the dentry name and the inode number.
Assuming that this proposed fix goes in: Since the inode number is the shmid, and this is a number that the kernel randomly chooses AFAIK, there should be no need to have different shm segments sharing the same inode number. The situation with the key is a bit more disturbing, though we already hit that anyway when IPC_PRIVATE is used. (why anybody would NOT use IPC_PRIVATE is a mystery) So having the key in the name doesn't make things worse. I have some concern about the device minor number. This should be the same for all shm mappings; I do not know if the behavior changed. - 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/