Re: mlock() "bogus check" (locked > num_physpages/2) _does_ hurt!

[Rob Love]

On Thu, 2003-12-11 at 13:59, Lutz Vieweg wrote:

> Is there any good reason to keep this check in the 2.4 kernel sources?

Not really.

> It's good to know the check is not present in the 2.6 sources, but I would
> like to get rid of it in 2.4, too...

It was removed from 2.6 for the reasons you cite.  2.4 could follow
suit.

It does lead to problems, though, where you can memlock too much memory
and lock the machine up.  But we could file that under "don't do that".

	Rob Love


-
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/