Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> OK. Seems like a nasty bug if one happens to want to do that. Should we
> backport this into 2.6.22.x?
>
Yes, please. Do you need me to do anything for that?
Thanks,
Herbert.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a m
Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2007, Dave McCracken wrote:
>> On Tuesday 10 July 2007, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>>> Mapped private readonly yes, but vm_stat_account() says
>>> if (file) {
>>> mm->shared_vm += pages;
>>> if ((flags & (VM_EXEC|VM_WRITE)) == VM_EXEC)
>>>
RLIM_INFINITY.
Signed-off-by: Herbert van den Bergh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- linux-2.6.22/mm/mlock.c.orig2007-07-09 10:19:31.0 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.22/mm/mlock.c 2007-07-09 10:19:19.0 -0700
@@ -244,9 +244,12 @@ int user_shm
.
This brings the Linux behavior in line with what is documented in the
POSIX man page for setrlimit(3p).
Signed-off-by: Herbert van den Bergh ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Signed-off-by: Dave McCracken ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
--- linux-2.6.22/fs/proc/task_mmu.c.orig2007-07-08 16:32:17.0
-0700
This patch fixes a bug in mm/mlock.c on 32-bit architectures that prevents
a user from locking more than 4GB of shared memory, or allocating more
than 4GB of shared memory in hugepages, when rlim[RLIMIT_MEMLOCK] is
set to RLIM_INFINITY.
Signed-off-by: Herbert van den Bergh <[EMAIL PROTEC
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2007 12:43:16 -0700 Herbert van den Bergh wrote:
>
>> Below is a patch I would like to submit for limiting process private
>> memory allocations via setrlimit(RLIMIT_DATA).
>
> The patch seems to have all tabs converted to spaces.
&
Below is a patch I would like to submit for limiting process private
memory allocations via setrlimit(RLIMIT_DATA).
Thanks,
Herbert van den Bergh.
This patch changes how the kernel limits memory allocations that are
controlled by setrlimit() using the RLIMIT_DATA resource. Currently the
7 matches
Mail list logo
