From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: righiandr@users.sourceforge.net
Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Marco Sbrighi <m.sbrighi@cineca.it>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [discuss] memrlimit - potential applications that can use
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:38:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1219250334.8960.30.camel@nimitz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a2776ec50808200625m5f6d9e6fs4d8e594bd259115a@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 15:25 +0200, righi.andrea@gmail.com wrote:
> Memory overcommit protection, instead, is a way to *prevent* OOM
> conditions (problem 1).
I completely disagree. :)
Think of all the work Eric Biederman did on pid namespaces. One of his
motivations was to keep /proc from being able to pin task structs. That
is one great example of a way a process can pin lots of memory without
mapping it, and overcommit has no effect on this!
Eric had a couple of other good examples, but I think task structs were
the biggest.
As I said to Balbir, there probably are some large-scale solutions to
this: things like beancounters.
-- Dave
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: righiandr@users.sourceforge.net
Cc: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Paul Menage <menage@google.com>,
Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Marco Sbrighi <m.sbrighi@cineca.it>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [discuss] memrlimit - potential applications that can use
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:38:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1219250334.8960.30.camel@nimitz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a2776ec50808200625m5f6d9e6fs4d8e594bd259115a@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 15:25 +0200, righi.andrea@gmail.com wrote:
> Memory overcommit protection, instead, is a way to *prevent* OOM
> conditions (problem 1).
I completely disagree. :)
Think of all the work Eric Biederman did on pid namespaces. One of his
motivations was to keep /proc from being able to pin task structs. That
is one great example of a way a process can pin lots of memory without
mapping it, and overcommit has no effect on this!
Eric had a couple of other good examples, but I think task structs were
the biggest.
As I said to Balbir, there probably are some large-scale solutions to
this: things like beancounters.
-- Dave
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-20 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-19 7:18 [discuss] memrlimit - potential applications that can use Balbir Singh
2008-08-19 7:18 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-19 15:58 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-19 15:58 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-19 16:45 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-19 16:45 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-19 17:41 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-19 17:41 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-20 8:26 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-20 8:26 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-20 16:29 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-20 16:29 ` Dave Hansen
2008-08-21 3:25 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 3:25 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 7:43 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-08-21 7:43 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-08-21 10:26 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 10:26 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 10:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-08-21 10:59 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2008-08-21 11:13 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 11:13 ` Balbir Singh
2008-08-21 15:18 ` righi.andrea
2008-08-21 15:18 ` righi.andrea
2008-08-20 13:25 ` righi.andrea
2008-08-20 13:25 ` righi.andrea
2008-08-20 16:38 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2008-08-20 16:38 ` Dave Hansen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1219250334.8960.30.camel@nimitz \
--to=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=m.sbrighi@cineca.it \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=righiandr@users.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.