On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 01:03:40PM -0400, Eric B Munson wrote: > With the refactored mlock code, introduce new system calls for mlock, > munlock, and munlockall. The new calls will allow the user to specify > what lock states are being added or cleared. mlock2 and munlock2 are > trivial at the moment, but a follow on patch will add a new mlock state > making them useful. > > munlock2 addresses a limitation of the current implementation. If a > user calls mlockall(MCL_CURRENT | MCL_FUTURE) and then later decides > that MCL_FUTURE should be removed, they would have to call munlockall() > followed by mlockall(MCL_CURRENT) which could potentially be very > expensive. The new munlockall2 system call allows a user to simply > clear the MCL_FUTURE flag. > > Signed-off-by: Eric B Munson <emun...@akamai.com>
... > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S b/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S > index 1acad02..f6d81d6 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/syscalls.S > @@ -363,3 +363,6 @@ SYSCALL(sys_bpf,compat_sys_bpf) > SYSCALL(sys_s390_pci_mmio_write,compat_sys_s390_pci_mmio_write) > SYSCALL(sys_s390_pci_mmio_read,compat_sys_s390_pci_mmio_read) > SYSCALL(sys_execveat,compat_sys_execveat) > +SYSCALL(sys_mlock2,compat_sys_mlock2) /* 355 */ > +SYSCALL(sys_munlock2,compat_sys_munlock2) > +SYSCALL(sys_munlockall2,compat_sys_munlockall2) FWIW, you would also need to add matching lines to the two files arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.c so that the system call would be wired up on s390. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
