On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:40:50AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 01:16:16PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:09:38AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:57:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > > From: Andrea Arcangeli
> > > >
> >
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 01:16:16PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:09:38AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:57:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > > From: Andrea Arcangeli
> > >
> > > Accurate userfaultfd WP tracking is possible by tracking exactly which
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:09:38AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:57:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > From: Andrea Arcangeli
> >
> > Accurate userfaultfd WP tracking is possible by tracking exactly which
> > virtual memory ranges were writeprotected by userland. We can't
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:57:08PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> From: Andrea Arcangeli
>
> Accurate userfaultfd WP tracking is possible by tracking exactly which
> virtual memory ranges were writeprotected by userland. We can't relay
> only on the RW bit of the mapped pagetable because that informati
From: Andrea Arcangeli
Accurate userfaultfd WP tracking is possible by tracking exactly which
virtual memory ranges were writeprotected by userland. We can't relay
only on the RW bit of the mapped pagetable because that information is
destroyed by fork() or KSM or swap. If we were to relay on tha
5 matches
Mail list logo