From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 16:53:51 -0700 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: overcommit stuff Message-ID: <20020921235351.GC25605@holomorphy.com> References: <3D8D0046.EF119E03@digeo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Description: brief message Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Andrew Morton , Alan Cox , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 12:46:59AM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote: > I don't think Alan can be held responsible for errors in the > overcommit stuff rml ported to 2.5 and I then added fixes to. > I believe it is up to date in 2.5. > Committed_AS certainly errs on the pessimistic side, that's > what it's about. How much swap do you have i.e. is 23GB > committed impossible, or just surprising to you? Does the > number go back to what it started off from when you kill > off the tests? How are "those pages" allocated e.g. what > mmap args? > Hugh In my case it's not really possible to rerun a test in the same boot. It's not really survived very often, and when it has, it generally fails to start a second time. Various other things feel the OOM sting then, e.g. kernel compiles, small task count dbench, etc. Some of this might be slab, but I think there might be a leak. The best answers I've come up with thus far are "Hrm, the OOM killer gets set off at the wrong times, and maybe delalloc would kill bh's?" Cheers, Bill -- 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/