| 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: Fri, 15 May 2009 11:22:07 -0700 From: Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>, Peter Ziljstra <a.p.ziljstra@...llo.nl>, San Mehat <san@...roid.com>, Arve Hj?nnev?g <arve@...roid.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Misleading OOM messages On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 13:59 -0400, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Fri, 15 May 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Ok, so kernel should be fixed to make limits 30% of non-mlocked > > memory. > > There is already ulimit. There is, but it gets overridden anyway since there are users that "need" tons of mlock() space. We also shouldn't be allowing things to get into crazy configurations. Having a max dirty ratio doesn't even have an effect when you can dirty all unlocked memory several times over and still not be hitting the max dirty mark. Perhaps we should ensure that total RAM mlock()ed + vm_dirty_bytes is always under total ram. That'll force people to either stop mlocking or do the safe thing which is drop vm_dirty_bytes. -- Dave -- 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