On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 10:50 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> On 04/11/2014 10:27 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> >> Hi Davidlohr,
> >>
> >> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >>> The default size for shmmax is, and always has
On 04/11/2014 10:27 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
On 04/11/2014 10:27 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 10:50 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
On 04/11/2014 10:27 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 13:27 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> > Your patch disables checking shmmax, shmall *AND* checking for SHMMIN.
>
> Right, if shmmax is 0, then there's no point checking for shmmin,
> otherwise we'd always end up
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Davidlohr,
>
> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
> > Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
> > making users have to increase it
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 13:27 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Fri, 2014-04-11 at 20:28 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Your patch disables checking shmmax, shmall *AND* checking for SHMMIN.
Right, if shmmax is 0, then there's no point checking for shmmin,
otherwise we'd always end up returning
On Sun, 2014-04-06 at 08:42 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/05/2014 08:24 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> I don't think it makes much sense to set unlimited for both 0 and
> >> ULONG_MAX, that would probably just create even
Hi,
On 04/05/2014 08:24 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
I don't think it makes much sense to set unlimited for both 0 and
ULONG_MAX, that would probably just create even more confusion.
I agree.
Unlimited was INT_MAX since 0.99.10 and
Hi,
On 04/05/2014 08:24 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
I don't think it makes much sense to set unlimited for both 0 and
ULONG_MAX, that would probably just create even more confusion.
I agree.
Unlimited was INT_MAX since
On Sun, 2014-04-06 at 08:42 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi,
On 04/05/2014 08:24 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
I don't think it makes much sense to set unlimited for both 0 and
ULONG_MAX, that would probably just create
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 19:39 -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>> >> Hi Davidlohr,
>> >>
>> >> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM,
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 19:39 -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 19:39 -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> >> Hi Davidlohr,
> >>
> >> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> > The default size for shmmax is, and
> This change allows Linux to treat shm just as regular anonymous memory.
> One important difference between them, though, is handling out-of-memory
> conditions: as opposed to regular anon memory, the OOM killer will not
> kill processes that are hogging memory through shm, allowing users to
>
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
>> Hi Davidlohr,
>>
>> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> > The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
>> > Today, in the XXI century, it seems that
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
> Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
> making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
> unnecessary work and userspace application
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Davidlohr,
>
> On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
> > Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
> > making users have to increase it
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application
(2014/04/03 9:20), Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application workarounds[1].
(2014/04/03 9:20), Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application workarounds[1].
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that
This change allows Linux to treat shm just as regular anonymous memory.
One important difference between them, though, is handling out-of-memory
conditions: as opposed to regular anon memory, the OOM killer will not
kill processes that are hogging memory through shm, allowing users to
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 19:39 -0400, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso davidl...@hp.com wrote:
On Thu, 2014-04-03 at 21:02 +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
Hi Davidlohr,
On 04/03/2014 02:20 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
The default size for shmmax is, and
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application workarounds[1].
Instead of choosing yet another arbitrary value,
The default size for shmmax is, and always has been, 32Mb.
Today, in the XXI century, it seems that this value is rather small,
making users have to increase it via sysctl, which can cause
unnecessary work and userspace application workarounds[1].
Instead of choosing yet another arbitrary value,
32 matches
Mail list logo
