Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 23:30:37 +0200 From: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <nick@garage.freebsd.pl> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VM problem... Message-ID: <20030721213037.GD43543@garage.freebsd.pl> In-Reply-To: <200307211932.h6LJWJuM027712@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20030720235759.GJ437@garage.freebsd.pl> <20030721181805.GA43543@garage.freebsd.pl> <200307211903.h6LJ3xrX027536@apollo.backplane.com> <20030721191622.GC43543@garage.freebsd.pl> <200307211932.h6LJWJuM027712@apollo.backplane.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 12:32:19PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: +> Hmm. Well, when a process forks the vm_map_entry's fork along with +> it. The underlying VM objects remain shared but become copy-on-write. Yes, but I mean while execve(), not fork(). Before execve() is called map got for example 65 pages in its vm map. One of this page is marked as read-only. After execve() process vm map got only 2 pages. I susspect, that pages from before execve() are floating around. And this read-only pages also and maybe it can be reused for stack? If not, what happend with them? -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek pawel@dawidek.net UNIX Systems Programmer/Administrator http://garage.freebsd.pl Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! http://cerber.sourceforge.net [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iQCVAwUBPxxbfT/PhmMH/Mf1AQHtygQAk+hqOjxo1cQT/5tfViUXXU7xPxZF9Vff 0g2cw6+/CVqsVKAFL3okmZC7OQBwN+UqXYUR/96la3qIL+TK7KvNcRg1eCAMJR98 qKpclJRd8z3XMFGs3FqnT78J0pR+mQvkXbcjy/YbaF7JxyEL06Kq/Zg3D9cgZav6 fWfIa2uDCCQ= =LqE1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030721213037.GD43543>