Matthias Andree schrieb am 2006-01-25: > What if the limit were RLIM_INFINITY for root processes instead of > hacking mlockall() and the resource checks? OK, reading Edgar's hint, the answer is "It's a bad idea." -- Matthias Andree - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Joerg Schilling <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Joerg Schilling <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: "Theodore Ts'o" <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- From: Matthias Andree <[email protected]>
- Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- Prev by Date: Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- Next by Date: poor raid0 performance in 2.6.16-rc1-mm2?
- Previous by thread: Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- Next by thread: Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?
- Index(es):
 |