Re: [OT] Testing PROT_NONE and other protections, and a surprise

Gabriel Paubert
2004-07-02T07:39:34Z

On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:43:05AM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Jul 01, 2004, at 08:39, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> >The error code is -1, aka. MAP_FAILED.
> Oops! I guess I was just lucky that part didn't fail :-D On the other
> hand, it
> couldn't legally return 0 anyway, could it? That would have been a
> slightly
> more sensible error code, IMHO, anyway, but it probably came from some
> silly standard somewhere.

It can, but only if you explicitly ask for it (MAP_FIXED with 0 as an
address), and it is very useful for DOS emulators.

Cheers,
Gabriel