| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 12:21:36 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com> To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] add MAP_UNLOCKED mmap flag On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 07:11:06PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi > > > If application does mlockall(MCL_FUTURE) it is no longer possible to > > mmap file bigger than main memory or allocate big area of anonymous > > memory. Sometimes it is desirable to lock everything related to program > > execution into memory, but still be able to mmap big file or allocate > > huge amount of memory and allow OS to swap them on demand. MAP_UNLOCKED > > allows to do that. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com> > > Why don't you use explicit munlock()? Because mmap will fail before I'll have a chance to run munlock on it. Actually when I run my process inside memory limited container host dies (I suppose trashing, but haven't checked). > Plus, Can you please elabrate which workload nedd this feature? > I wanted to run kvm with qemu process locked in memory, but guest memory unlocked. And guest memory is bigger then host memory in the case I am testing. I found out that it is impossible currently. -- Gleb. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists