lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [ckrm-tech] RFC: Memory Controller
From
Date
On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 11:48 +0300, Pavel Emelianov wrote:
> If memory is considered to be unreclaimable then actions should be
> taken at mmap() time, not later! Rejecting mmap() is the only way to
> limit user in unreclaimable memory consumption.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Today, if a kernel exceeds its
allocation limits (runs out of memory) it gets killed. Doing the
limiting at mmap() time instead of fault time will keep a sparse memory
applications from even being able to run.

Now, failing an mmap() is a wee bit more graceful than a SIGBUS, but it
certainly introduces its own set of problems.

-- Dave

-
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: 2006-10-31 18:07    [W:0.241 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site