lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Aug]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: can't mlockall() more than 128MB, is this a kernel limitiation ?
Hi!

> -----
> /* we may lock at most half of physical memory... */
> /* (this check is pretty bogus, but doesn't hurt) */
> if (locked > num_physpages/2)
> goto out;
> -----
>
> Argh ! this is bogus ! , on my 250MB RAM BOX , I want to be able to mlock at
> least something like 200-220MB ,
>
> What is the purpose of this artificial limitation ?
> I agree that running out of phys pages is bad, but with those big mem sizes like
> 256-512MB, a margin of 30-50MB (configurable) should be enough.

> Can we make this configurable via sysctl in 2.4 ?
> (without this realtime multimedia apps will be unable to take advantage of the
> full amount of RAM, because swappable mem is useless in certain
> cases)

No! No sysctl, thank you. Comment clearly says it is bogus, and now it
even hurts. Just delete the check.
Pavel
--
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org

-
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.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:2.013 / U:0.800 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site