On 19/02/18(Mon) 16:31, Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:22:30 +0100
> > From: Martin Pieuchot
> >
> > Now that suser() is no longer messing with a per-process field, we
> > can directly turn setrtable(2) as NOLOCK.
> >
> > Apart from sanity checks this
> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:22:30 +0100
> From: Martin Pieuchot
>
> Now that suser() is no longer messing with a per-process field, we
> can directly turn setrtable(2) as NOLOCK.
>
> Apart from sanity checks this syscall writes an int-sized per-process
> field. Is a memory