Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 25 Sep 2001 17:01:41 -0300 (BRT) | From | Marcelo Tosatti <> | Subject | Re: 2.4.10 VM: what avoids from having lots of unwriteable inactive pages |
| |
On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Rick Haines wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 01:13:37PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Tue, 25 Sep 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > > > > > > > swap_out() will deactivate everything it finds to be not-recently used, > > > > > and that's how the inactive list ends up getting replenished. > > > > > > > > mlock() > > > > > > Hey, if you've mlock'ed more than your available memory, there's nothing > > > the VM layer can do. Except maybe a nice printk("Kiss your *ss goodbye"); > > Shouldn't there be a threshold where mlock will fail?
There is (for users). Take a look at ulimit:
-l The maximum size that may be locked into memory
> Or are you saying that in general mlocking lots of memory will screw the > VM?
Yes it will.
- 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/
|  |