Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:34:12 +1000 From: Gregory Bond <gnb@itga.com.au> To: "Mark W. Krentel" <krentel@dreamscape.com> Cc: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/64573: mmap with PROT_NONE, but still could be read Message-ID: <200404140534.PAA23575@lightning.itga.com.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 14 Apr 2004 00:41:23 -0400.
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The same bug happens mmap()-ing a file with PROT_WRITE, you still get > read access. In this case, PROT_NONE was just the simplest way to > demonstrate the bug. IIRC, in the original mmap man page lo these many years ago, there was a proviso about "hardware willing" (with the "PROT_WRITE implies PROT_READ" case explicitly mentioned). I wonder if the implementation still favours efficient implementation over semantic correctness, and if this proviso might be noted in the man page? Is it even possible to implement PROT_WRITE&~PROT_READ or PROT_NONE on i386?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404140534.PAA23575>