Re: shm_open ENAMETOOLONG
Re: shm_open ENAMETOOLONG
- Subject: Re: shm_open ENAMETOOLONG
- From: Terry Lambert <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 22:38:31 -0700
The control blocks, which includes the name buffer, which would have
to go up by a muninum of 993 bytes to be standards proof, and that's
assuming some things that might not be safe to assume.
-- Terry
On Aug 21, 2008, at 9:01 PM, Amanda Walker <email@hidden> wrote:
On Aug 21, 2008, at 6:34 PM, Terry Lambert wrote:
When someone asks if they should use POSIX shared memory, we
generally tell them we prefer mmap'ed files, if you want a large
path to things, and that has the bonus of not taking wired memory,
providing the same string-based rendezvous, plus you can use FS
permissions, including ACLs, to protect access to the shared memory
itself.
Hmm. POSIX shared memory segments are wired down? That seems bad.
Or is just a control block in the kernel?
--Amanda
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden