From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 20:43:25 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: Running out of memory in 1 easy step Message-ID: <20000914204325.A6015@fred.muc.de> References: <20000914145904.B18741@liacs.nl> <20000914175633.A7675@fred.muc.de> <20000914180825.B19822@liacs.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20000914180825.B19822@liacs.nl>; from wichert@soil.nl on Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 06:08:28PM +0200 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Wichert Akkerman Cc: Andi Kleen , linux-mm@kvack.org, riel@conectiva.com.br List-ID: On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 06:08:28PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Andi Kleen wrote: > > There is a hardwired limit of 1024 vmas/process. This is to avoid denial > > of service attacks with attackers using up all memory with vmas. > > That's trivial to circumvent using multiple processes or even threads which > makes it a useless and possibly damaging protection imho.. The limit is actually 65536 I misremembered it. The main purpose is probably to avoid the counter wrapping. When get_unmapped_area failed you likely just ran out of virtual address space. -Andi -- This is like TV. I don't like TV. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/