Re: [PATCH] Read only syscall tables for x86_64 and i386

Christoph Lameter
2005-06-28T19:45:15Z

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:

> It's unfortunately useless because all the kernel is mapped in the
> same 2 or 4MB page has to be writable because it overlaps with real
> direct mapped memory.

The question is: Are syscall tables are supposed to be
writable? If no then this patch should go in. If yes then forget about it.
On IA64 they are readonly and so I thought they should also be readonly
on i386 and x86_64.

The ability to protect a readonly section may be another issue.