On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 03:24:05PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote: > While you're at it, you might want to evaluate the return code of > mlock()/munlock(). My manpage (old Linux 2.4.20 system) has the return > values ENOMEM, EPERM, EINVAL. That's nice. The manpages I have say: RETURN VALUE On success these system calls return 0. On error, -1 is returned, errno is set appropriately, and no changes are made to any locks in the address space of the process. This is basically incompatible with what you're describing. If we can't even do it simply between major versions of Linux, I would suggest the feature's going to be more hassle than it's worth by the time we get done with all the operating systems. Brendan/Thomas, you want to make a call on this? -- Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature