From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266696AbUBMD0O (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:26:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266700AbUBMD0N (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:26:13 -0500 Received: from mail.shareable.org ([81.29.64.88]:29058 "EHLO mail.shareable.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266696AbUBMD0M (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:26:12 -0500 Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 03:26:04 +0000 From: Jamie Lokier To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ingo Molnar , Andi Kleen , benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, Ulrich Drepper Subject: Re: [BUG] get_unmapped_area() change -> non booting machine Message-ID: <20040213032604.GI25499@mail.shareable.org> References: <1076384799.893.5.camel@gaston> <20040210173738.GA9894@mail.shareable.org> <20040213002358.1dd5c93a.ak@suse.de> <20040212100446.GA2862@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > One option is to mark the brk() VMA's as being grow-up (which they are), > and make get_unmapped_area() realize that it should avoid trying to > allocate just above grow-up segments or just below grow-down segments. > That's still something of a special case, but at least it's not "magic" > any more, now it's more of a "makes sense". That reminds me. What happens when grow-down stack VMAs finally bump into another VMA. Is there an unmapped guard page retained to segfault the program, or does the program silently start overwriting the VMA it bumped into? -- Jamie