lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.2/2.4/2.6 VMs: do malloc() ever return NULL?
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> Rik van Riel wrote:
>
>>>Strict non-overcommit mode. You can allocate as much
>>>non-file-backed virtual memory as will fit in swap,
>>>plus /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_percentage worth of memory.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 11:30:23AM +0100, Ihar 'Philips' Filipau wrote:
>
>> [ s/overcommit_percentage/overcommit_ratio/ ]
>> Thanks! On 2.6 it works as expected. Test with two concurrent memory
>>allocations took some time, but both apps stops exactly when memory was
>>depleted. Great.
>> Did rmap has something todo with this?
>> As I see from implementation of do_mmap_pgoff() - it changed from 2.4
>>to 2.6 - but there are a lot of common things.
>> If I will do dumb back port of this check to 2.4 - do you think it
>>will work? 2.4->2.6 memory accounting changed?
>> I didn't found this check in your rmap patches for 2.4.22. (btw
>>thanks for keeping them up-to-date).
>
>
> In principle, non-overcommit shouldn't be dependent on rmap, as it
> largely consists of keeping track of the sum of MAP_PRIVATE virtual
> mappings' sizes and refusing them when they exceed RAM + swap.
>

That's the point of my question. I know a few about MM in Linux. As I
understand memory accounting is most complicated: 1st how to account
kernel allocatable memory, 2nd how to reliably calculate already
allocated memory. (1st looks like not present even in 2.6, 2nd not
present in 2.4.)

As I understood, default overcommit_ratio=90% is made especially to
protect kernel from running out of memory. And 2.6 does offset available
memory by 3% for all non-root allocation checks.

But I cannot find any similar accounting stuff in 2.4...
Hard to draw parallels.

Will appreciate any advice.

--
Ihar 'Philips' Filipau / with best regards from Saarbruecken.
-- _ _ _
Because the kernel depends on it existing. "init" |_|*|_|
literally _is_ special from a kernel standpoint, |_|_|*|
because its' the "reaper of zombies" (and, may I add, |*|*|*|
that would be a great name for a rock band).
-- Linus Torvalds

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.041 / U:2.988 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site