From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Feb  6 14:17:18 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 031B516A4CE
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  6 Feb 2004 14:17:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp01.syd.iprimus.net.au (smtp01.syd.iprimus.net.au
	[210.50.30.52])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0D043D45
	for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  6 Feb 2004 14:17:16 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from tim@robbins.dropbear.id.au)
Received: from robbins.dropbear.id.au (210.50.112.210) by
	smtp01.syd.iprimus.net.au (7.0.024)
	id 400C4DF40075692B; Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:18:42 +1100
Received: by robbins.dropbear.id.au (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 34A2441AD; Sat,  7 Feb 2004 09:17:03 +1100 (EST)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 09:17:03 +1100
From: Tim Robbins <tjr@freebsd.org>
To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>
Message-ID: <20040206221703.GB54490@cat.robbins.dropbear.id.au>
References: <20040206120323.A68951@xorpc.icir.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040206120323.A68951@xorpc.icir.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
cc: hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: munmap.2 inconsistency ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 22:17:18 -0000

On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 12:03:23PM -0800, Luigi Rizzo wrote:

> hi,
> browsing through the munmap() page, it says
>      Munmap() will fail if:
> 
>      [EINVAL]           The addr parameter was not page aligned, the len
> 			...
> 
> now, i have verified that munmap works fine with any address returned
> by mmap, even if not aligned, at least on a recent -STABLE.
> 
> As i assume that passing munmap() the same address returned by mmap()
> is common behaviour, should we rephrase the manpage ?

This could have slipped in from POSIX, which requires page-aligned
addresses and lengths to mmap() & friends. I believe SVR4 also
requires this. But yes, the manual pages should be corrected.


Tim