linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.20 OOM with 8Gb RAM

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: <20070413223935.GA6783@metaxa.reflex>
Date:	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:39:36 -0400
From:	Jason Lunz <lunz@...ooley.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Cameron Schaus <cam@...aus.ca>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.20 OOM with 8Gb RAM

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 12:15:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> All of ZONE_NORMAL got used by ramdisk, and networking wants to
> allocate a page from ZONE_NORMAL.  An oom-killing is the correct
> response, although probably not effective.
> 
> ramdisk is a nasty thing - cannot you use ramfs or tmpfs?

What do you mean by "nasty thing"? I've heard that about loopback too.

If I want to run a system entirely from ram with a compressed filesystem
image mounted on /, is it better to store that image in a ramdisk, or on
a tmpfs and mount it via loopback?

Jason
-
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/