From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from outpipe-village-512-1.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:41407 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750787AbWIOKrl (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:47:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] make PROT_WRITE imply PROT_READ From: Alan Cox In-Reply-To: <450A31D4.1020108@linux.intel.com> References: <200609150139.k8F1dl7Y014791@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> <450A31D4.1020108@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:10:08 +0100 Message-Id: <1158318608.29932.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, jbaron@redhat.com, ak@muc.de, benh@kernel.crashing.org, geert@linux-m68k.org, hugh@veritas.com, kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp, lethal@linux-sh.org, paulus@samba.org, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, spyro@f2s.com, tony.luck@intel.com, zippel@linux-m68k.org List-ID: Ar Gwe, 2006-09-15 am 06:53 +0200, ysgrifennodd Arjan van de Ven: > This patch will create a userspace ABI precedent that will hurt us if we ever > decide to implement this, or if Intel or AMD add support for this to the cpu... You mean like noexec didn't. It's just a question of binary type if such a mapping type comes into existance. At the moment the behaviour is essentially random. Alan