Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:27:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:27:06 -0500 Received: from packet.digeo.com ([12.110.80.53]:23206 "EHLO packet.digeo.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:27:05 -0500 Message-ID: <3DEFFEAA.6B386051@digeo.com> Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 17:34:34 -0800 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.5.50 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrea Arcangeli CC: Norman Gaywood , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Maybe a VM bug in 2.4.18-18 from RH 8.0? References: <20021206111326.B7232@turing.une.edu.au> <3DEFF69F.481AB823@digeo.com> <20021206011733.GF1567@dualathlon.random> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Dec 2002 01:34:34.0224 (UTC) FILETIME=[A1879F00:01C29CC7] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 878 Lines: 23 Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > ... > He may still suffer other known problems besides > the above two critical highmem fixes (for example if > lower_zone_reserve_ratio is not applied and there's no other fix around > it IMHO, that's generic OS problem not only for linux, and that was my > only sensible solution to fix it, the approch in mainline is way too > weak to make a real difference) argh. I hate that one ;) Giving away 100 megabytes of memory hurts. I've never been able to find the workload which makes this necessary. Can you please describe an "exploit" against 2.4.20 which demonstrates the need for this? Thanks. - 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/