Re: tmpfs and the OOM killer

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Apr 11 2007 21:48, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 02:23:31AM -0300, Pedro wrote:
>>   After suffering some days from a not|mis configured tmpfs,
>> 
>>   As the OOM killer is not Posix,
>> 
>>   Better than to kill processes would be to resize tmpfs, to use tmpfs empty 
>> space.
>
>Will not work, because tmpfs does not use any memory for unused space. If
>you don't believe me, simply create a large file on your tmpfs, then check
>free memory, then remove the file and check free memory again.
>
>So your problem is not caused by the empty space on tmpfs, but either by
>too much space used on tmpfs or by your application using too much memory.
>
>>   I'm using kernel 2.6.20.4. If someone ask I'll send a test application.
>
>Not needed, the one-liner "main(){while(malloc(4096));}" is enough to
>trigger an OOM.

No, that won't do anything, malloc happily returns NULL after a few seconds.

int main()
{
	while(1) {
		char *p = malloc(4096);
		*p = 1;
	}
}

This is more likely to trigger OOM, because it actually dirties the page.


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