Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:01:06 +0100 | From | Matthias Andree <> | Subject | Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK? |
| |
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> yes the behavior is like this > > root non-root > before about half of ram nothing > after all of ram by default small, increasable > [...] > What application do you have in mind that broke by this relaxing of > rules?
This is not something I'd like to disclose here yet.
It is an application that calls mlockall(MCL_CURRENT|MCL_FUTURE) and apparently copes with mlockall() returning EPERM (or doesn't even try it) but can apparently NOT cope with valign() tripping over mmap() == -1/EAGAIN.
The relevant people are Bcc:d.
-- Matthias Andree - 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/
| |