From owner-freebsd-security Fri Dec 24 11: 0: 5 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from bomber.avantgo.com (ws1.avantgo.com [207.214.200.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E29D21518D; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:00:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from scott@avantgo.com) Received: from river ([10.0.128.30]) by bomber.avantgo.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.5) with SMTP id 354; Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:55:35 -0800 Message-ID: <102201bf4e40$f23c3a10$1e80000a@avantgo.com> From: "Scott Hess" To: "John Polstra" , "Michael Sierchio" Cc: , References: Subject: Re: mlockall() not supported (2nd query) Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 10:59:03 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org John Polstra wrote: > Michael Sierchio wrote: > > mlockall() and munlockall() don't appear to be supported on FreeBSD. > > The most effective way to get them supported is to submit patches. > From a quick look at mlock() in "src/sys/vm/vm_mmap.c", it doesn't > look all that difficult. Does anything bad happen if you mlock() essentially everything? Something like mlock( NULL, (unsigned)-1), but perhaps more targetted than that. That would appear to lock all of the VM pages you already are using, but perhaps not the VM pages you haven't allocated as of yet? Later, scott To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message