From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:13 -0400 Received: from unused ([12.150.234.220]:52222 "EHLO one.isilinux.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:41:07 -0400 Message-ID: <3B8FF671.1050804@interactivesi.com> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 15:41:21 -0500 From: Timur Tabi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.3+) Gecko/20010815 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kernel hangs in 118th call to vmalloc In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Cox wrote: > vmalloc shouldnt be hanging the box, although in 2.4.2 the out of memory > handling is not too reliable. You have to understand vmalloc isnt meant to > be used that way and the kernel gets priority over user space for allocs so > is able to get itself to the point it killed off all user space. So you're saying it's a bug that I can't work around? It's probably a moot point. I've come up with a different algorithm that allocates all but 32MB of RAM, and it appears to work well. I heard that 2.4.9 doesn't even run "thrash". Is this true? If so, why are these buggy VM's being released in the first place?