linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.25-rc3: 34TB vmalloc total -- overflow in /proc/meminfo?

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: <20080305212139.GA31999@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:21:39 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc:	Christian Kujau <lists@...dbynature.de>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc3: 34TB vmalloc total -- overflow in /proc/meminfo?

Hi!

> > > CommitLimit:   4132360 kB
> > > Committed_AS:    27684 kB
> > > VmallocTotal: 34359738367 kB
> > > VmallocUsed:     18112 kB
> > > VmallocChunk: 34359720115 kB
> 
> I don't see what Pavel's issue is with this: it's simply a fact that
> with a 64-bit kernel, we've lots of virtual address space to spare
> for vmalloc.  What would be surprising is for VmallocUsed to get up
> as high as that.

Hmm... ok, I see, I thought "clearly this overflowed somewhere", and I
was wrong, it is expected result.

Still.... what is 34TB of vmalloc space good for when we can only ever
allocate 4GB (because that is how much physical memory we have?)? To
prevent fragmentation? 

								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/