From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 22:19:57 +0530 From: Amit Shah Subject: Re: [PATCH] strict VM overcommit for stock 2.4 Message-Id: <20020719221957.068f8323.shahamit@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <1027018996.1116.136.camel@sinai> References: <1027018996.1116.136.camel@sinai> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Robert Love Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: One question: do you have a strict vm overcommit patch for 2.4.18? On 18 Jul 2002 12:03:16 -0700 Robert Love wrote: RL> On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 11:56, Richard B. Johnson wrote: RL> RL> > What should have happened is each of the tasks need only about RL> > 4k until they actually access something. Since they can't possibly RL> > access everything at once, we need to fault in pages as needed, RL> > not all at once. This is what 'overcomit' is, and it is necessary. RL> RL> Then do not enable strict overcommit, Dick. RL> RL> > If you have 'fixed' something so that no RAM ever has to be paged RL> > you have a badly broken system. RL> RL> That is not the intention of Alan or I's work at all. RL> RL> Robert Love --- - Amit Want to know more about me? Follow this link-> http://amitshah.nav.to/ -- 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-mm.org/