Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 22 Aug 1998 18:46:23 -0400 | From | Division by Zero <> | Subject | Small problem with malloc() tested on 2.1.117/115 (and maybe affecting others) |
| |
I have found that when I malloc() memory and do not access it/clear it, I can malloc() a very large amount (around 2 gigabytes). I only have around 170 MB in swap and ram. If I immediately memset() after each malloc(), I have found that malloc will properly return NULL when it cannot allocate more. Now the problem comes when I allocate all 2 gigabytes, then after all that I loop again to memset() them. When it reaches beyond the bound of available ram, I find that my computer slows to a near halt (even running as normal user). I cannot do anything (except switch VC) until CTRL-C or Alt-SYSRQ-K (and even after that it takes about 2 - 3 minutes to close out the program and restore all). Somebody else who tested this on their machine (I tested it on my two..same for both) says the program segfaults.
I'm not sure how much of a bug this could really be considered, but usually when I malloc() I expect that I will have that memory there (assuming it did not return NULL) to use and will not have to worry about writing out into oblivion. While this bug is present, I could see this causing programs to act weird or otherwise cause problems when memory is low.
Regards, David
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |