Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751464Ab0HUQIq (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:08:46 -0400 Received: from pfepa.post.tele.dk ([195.41.46.235]:51054 "EHLO pfepa.post.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751086Ab0HUQIo (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:08:44 -0400 Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:08:39 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Linus Torvalds , Tony Luck Cc: Ian Campbell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org, stable-review@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Greg KH , Peter Zijlstra , Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [RFC] mlock/stack guard interaction fixup Message-ID: <20100821160839.GA26375@merkur.ravnborg.org> References: <1282391770.29609.1223.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 943 Lines: 24 > > > Out of interest, why is there no guard page for the VM_GROWSUP stack > > case? Is it just that the memory layout on PA-RISC makes the stack grows > > into the heap scenario impossible? > > No, it's just that I can't find it in myself to care about PA-RISC, so > I never wrote the code. I don't think anything else has a grows-up > stack. And even if I were to write the code, I couldn't even test it. > > It should be reasonably easy to do the VM_GROWSUP case too, but > somebody with a PA-RISC would need to do it. Tony Luck already provided a VM_GROWSUP version. See: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/20/325 [It is signed off by Tony Luc - but I guess they know each other ;-) ] Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/