Messages in this thread | | | From | Kyle Moffett <> | Subject | Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit | Date | Sun, 1 Apr 2007 14:43:52 -0400 |
| |
On Apr 01, 2007, at 14:36:11, devzero@web.de wrote: >> Blame on the dual meaning of max_loop that it uses currently: to >> initialize a set of loop devices and as a side effect, it also sets >> the upper limit. People are complaining about the former constrain, >> isn't it? Does anyone uses the 2nd meaning of upper limit? >> >> - Ken > > what sense would it make to set an upper limit at all? > > we`re so happy to have none anymore :)
Well, the point of an upper limit might be to keep loop devices from chewing up too much memory on a system. IE: To fail allocating more loopdevs before you run OOM and start killing random userspace processes.
Cheers, Kyle Moffett
- 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/
| |