Re: [PATCH] kanoj-mm2.0-2.2.9 unneccesary page force in by munlock

Linus Torvalds
1999-05-17T16:11:24Z

On Sun, 16 May 1999, Kanoj Sarcar wrote:
>
> Hmm, my logic was a little bit different. Note that you can call munlock()
> on a range even when a previous mlock() has not been done on the range (I
> think that's not an munlock error in POSIX). In 2.2.9, this would end up
> faulting in the pages, which doesn't need to happen ... (haven't really
> thought whether "root" can erroneously force memory deadlocks this way)

Well, if you look closely, the mlock_fixup() routine tests whether
lockedness has changed and returns early if it hasn't.. So in your case
nothing at all would have been done..

Linus