From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier Galibert Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] add MAP_UNLOCKED mmap flag Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 20:50:54 +0200 Message-ID: <20091007185054.GB66690@dspnet.fr.eu.org> References: <20091006190938.126F.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091006102136.GH9832@redhat.com> <20091006192454.1272.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <20091006103300.GI9832@redhat.com> <2f11576a0910060510y401c1d5ax6f17135478d22899@mail.gmail.com> <20091006121603.GK9832@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091006121603.GK9832@redhat.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Gleb Natapov Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 02:16:03PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > I did. It allows me to achieve something I can't now. Steps you provide > just don't fit my needs. I need all memory areas (current and feature) to be > locked except one. Very big one. You propose to lock memory at some > arbitrary point and from that point on all newly mapped memory areas will > be unlocked. Don't you see it is different? What about mlockall(MCL_CURRENT); mmap(...); mlockall(MCL_FUTURE);? Or toggle MCL_FUTURE if a mlockall call can stop it? OG. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org