Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit

[devzero@web.de]

> Well, the point of an upper limit might be to keep loop devices from  
> chewing up too much memory on a system.  IE: To fail allocating more  
> loopdevs before you run OOM and start killing random userspace  
> processes.

ok, sounds reasonable. 

but - not very sure here, but don`t you need to be root for creating loop devices and don`t you have many other ways to chew up too  much memory then, anyway ?


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@mac.com>
> Gesendet: 01.04.07 20:44:04
> An: devzero@web.de
> CC: Ken Chen <kenchen@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Betreff: Re: [patch] remove artificial software max_loop limit


> On Apr 01, 2007, at 14:36:11, devzero@web.de wrote:
> >> Blame on the dual meaning of max_loop that it uses currently: to
> >> initialize a set of loop devices and as a side effect, it also sets
> >> the upper limit.  People are complaining about the former constrain,
> >> isn't it?  Does anyone uses the 2nd meaning of upper limit?
> >>
> >> - Ken
> >
> > what sense would it make to set an upper limit at all?
> >
> > we`re so happy to have none anymore :)
> 
> Well, the point of an upper limit might be to keep loop devices from  
> chewing up too much memory on a system.  IE: To fail allocating more  
> loopdevs before you run OOM and start killing random userspace  
> processes.
> 
> Cheers,
> Kyle Moffett
> 
> 


_______________________________________________________________
SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und
kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192