Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:25:52 -0600 From: "Alan L. Cox" <alc@imimic.com> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Virtual memory question Message-ID: <3E239150.9FC363DD@imimic.com> References: <20030114041407.DDFC32A89E@canning.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Wemm wrote: > ... > Sorry about the ambiguity. No problem. :-) > My problem with the shm_*() calls is that the API is pretty heavily tied to > the file system. If there is a way to avoid that, then fine. It looks > like one needs to ftruncate() it to resize a shm_open() object. From the spec (on the web page that I mentioned): "The name argument points to a string naming a shared memory object. It is unspecified whether the name appears in the file system and is visible to other functions that take pathnames as arguments." I don't think ftruncate() is necessary. The underlying shm object can be grown implicitly according to its mmap()ings. I do not, however, know of a way to shrink an shm object. Alan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E239150.9FC363DD>