![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-01 09:05 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||