Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 11:48 +0300, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
>> If memory is considered to be unreclaimable then actions should be
>> taken at mmap() time, not later! Rejecting mmap() is the only way to
>> limit user in unreclaimable memory consumption.
>
> I don't think this is necessarily true. Today, if a kernel exceeds its
> allocation limits (runs out of memory) it gets killed. Doing the
> limiting at mmap() time instead of fault time will keep a sparse memory
> applications from even being able to run.
If limiting _every_ mapping it will, but when limiting only
"private" mappings - no problems at all. BC code lives for
more than 3 years already and no claims from users on this
question yet.
> Now, failing an mmap() is a wee bit more graceful than a SIGBUS, but it
> certainly introduces its own set of problems.
>
> -- Dave
>
>
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
