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]

Date:	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:01:39 -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 Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 03:46:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> Store it all in ramfs, no loopback needed?

I used to put everything in a tmpfs on /, and that certainly works. But
most files in a typical image are rarely used and it's a pity to have
lots of little files taking up a 4k page each.

You get pretty big savings by compressing the system into a squashfs and
mounting that, so the question becomes: where to put the squashfs?
ramdisk or loopback mount it from tmpfs/ramfs?

iirc, the problems with loopback have to do with writeout, which isn't a
problem here since squashfs is readonly.

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/