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: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:40:14 +1100 From: paul.szabo@...ney.edu.au To: dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, pavel@....cz Cc: 695182@...s.debian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Reproducible OOM with just a few sleeps Dear Pavel and Dave, > The assertion was that 4GB with no PAE passed a forkbomb test (ooming) > while 4GB of RAM with PAE hung, thus _PAE_ is broken. Yes, PAE is broken. Still, maybe the above needs slight correction: non-PAE HIGHMEM4G passed the "sleep test": no OOM, nothing unexpected; whereas PAE OOMed then hung (tested with various RAM from 3GB to 64GB). The feeling I get is that amd64 is proposed as a drop-in replacement for PAE, that support and development of PAE is gone, that PAE is dead. Cheers, Paul Paul Szabo psz@...hs.usyd.edu.au http://www.maths.usyd.edu.au/u/psz/ School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sydney Australia -- 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