From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 30 13:44:58 2003 Return-Path: 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 DD9F116A4BF for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:44:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kientzle.com (h-66-166-149-50.SNVACAID.covad.net [66.166.149.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C58043FE9 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:44:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Received: from acm.org (big.x.kientzle.com [66.166.149.54]) by kientzle.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7UKitsE075571; Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:44:55 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kientzle@acm.org) Message-ID: <3F510CFD.1070400@acm.org> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 13:45:49 -0700 From: Tim Kientzle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030524 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Pedro F. Giffuni" References: <20030830203415.54268.qmail@web13402.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20030830203415.54268.qmail@web13402.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Non-executable mappings now in NetBSD too X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: kientzle@acm.org List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 20:44:59 -0000 Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: > Just for reference, I found links to these interesting postings on NetBSD and > OpenBSD respectively: > > http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-kern/2003/08/24/0009.html > > http://www.sigmasoft.com/~openbsd/archive/openbsd-tech/200301/msg00251.html > > Last time I asked, I learned our signal trampoline had been impleneted on > userland like on NetBSD's IRIX emulation (not sure about all platforms though), > so work on this would be really good. The OpenBSD work on tightening up read/write/exec memory permissions looks interesting, but I wonder what impact it has on JIT technologies; do the current Java VMs or other incremental compilation engines require write+exec? Tim