linux-kernel - Re: additional oom-killer tuneable worth submitting?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20061208155537.6f19b7e9@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 8 Dec 2006 15:55:37 +0000
From:	Alan <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Al Boldi <a1426z@...ab.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: additional oom-killer tuneable worth submitting?

> What I understood from Arjan is that the problem isn't swapspace, but rather 
> that shared-libs are implement via a COW trick, which always overcommits, no 
> matter what.

The zero overcommit layer accounts address space not pages.

> Are you saying there is some new no-overcommit functionality in 2.6.19, or 
> has this been there before?

Red Hat Enterprise Linux for a very long time, got merged upstream a long
long time ago to. Then got various fixes along the way. It's old
functionality.

Alan
-
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/