Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:25:11 -0600 From: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> Cc: alc@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Alexander Best <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de> Subject: Re: mmap(2) with MAP_ANON honouring offset although it shouldn't Message-ID: <4AF1C707.6000706@cs.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <20091104162646.GZ1293@hoeg.nl> References: <permail-200910211551041e86ffa80000182a-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de> <ca3526250910211051v2fef55e7yda262a58df200751@mail.gmail.com> <20091103172452.GU1293@hoeg.nl> <200911040812.18712.jhb@freebsd.org> <20091104162646.GZ1293@hoeg.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ed Schouten wrote: > * John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> Note that the spec doesn't cover MAP_ANON at all FWIW. >> > > Yes. I've noticed Linux also uses MAP_ANONYMOUS instead of MAP_ANON. > They do provide MAP_ANON for compatibility, if I remember correctly. > > For what it's worth, I believe that Solaris does the exact opposite. They provide MAP_ANONYMOUS for compatibility. It seems like a good idea for us to do the same. We also have an unimplemented option MAP_RENAME defined for compatibility with "Sun" that is nowhere mentioned in modern Solaris documentation. Alan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AF1C707.6000706>