Re: Protecting against unexpected zero-pages: proposal

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:

> But buffering the page only means you've got some consistent view of
> the page. It doesn't mean the checksum will actually match the data in
> the page that gets written out. So when you read it back in the
> checksum may be invalid.

I was assuming that if the code went through the trouble to buffer the
shared page to get a "stable, non-changing" copy to use for
checksumming/writing it, it would write() the buffered copy it just
made, not the original in shared memory... I'm not sure how that
write could be in-consistent.

a.

--
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.