Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK? | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Mon, 23 Jan 2006 19:13:13 +0100 |
| |
On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 19:01 +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: > 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
hmm... curious that mlockall() succeeds with only a 32kb rlimit....
- 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/
| |