Re: [PATCH] strict VM overcommit for stock 2.4

From: Robert Love (rml@tech9.net)
Date: Thu Jul 18 2002 - 14:03:16 EST


On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 11:56, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

> What should have happened is each of the tasks need only about
> 4k until they actually access something. Since they can't possibly
> access everything at once, we need to fault in pages as needed,
> not all at once. This is what 'overcomit' is, and it is necessary.

Then do not enable strict overcommit, Dick.

> If you have 'fixed' something so that no RAM ever has to be paged
> you have a badly broken system.

That is not the intention of Alan or I's work at all.

        Robert Love

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 23 2002 - 22:00:27 EST