On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 03:02:34PM -0700, Till Smejkal wrote: > I don't agree here. VAS segments are basically in-memory files that are > handled by > the kernel directly without using a file system. Hence, if an application > uses a VAS > segment to store data the same rules apply as if it uses a file. Everything > that it > saves in the VAS segment might be accessible by other applications. An > application > using VAS segments should be aware of this fact. In addition, the resources > that are > represented by a VAS segment are not leaked. As I said, VAS segments are much > like > files. Hence, if you don't want to use them any more, delete them. But as > with files, > the kernel will not delete them for you (although something like this can be > added).
So how do they differ from shmget(2), shmat(2), shmdt(2), shmctl(2)? Apart from VAS having better names, instead of silly "key_t key" ones. -Tony _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc