Re: Small problem with malloc() tested on 2.1.117/115 (and maybe affecting others)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: getlkl@terrorist.math.ntu.edu.tw: "Sector size 2068?? Can I even access this in Linux??"
• Previous message: Andrew Derrick Balsa: "Cyrix CPUs, 2.0.35-pre6 and 2.1.115 and later kernels"
• Maybe in reply to: Division by Zero: "Small problem with malloc() tested on 2.1.117/115 (and maybe affecting others)"

Marc SCHAEFER wrote:

> Division by Zero <paradox@maine.rr.com> wrote:
> > I have found that when I malloc() memory and do not access it/clear it,
> > I can malloc() a very large amount (around 2 gigabytes). I only have
> > around 170 MB in swap and ram. If I immediately memset() after each
>
> Look for memory over-committing in the documentation. You can
> disable this if it is a problem for you, but system-wide only,
> and only in 2.1.x
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html

• Next message: getlkl@terrorist.math.ntu.edu.tw: "Sector size 2068?? Can I even access this in Linux??"
• Previous message: Andrew Derrick Balsa: "Cyrix CPUs, 2.0.35-pre6 and 2.1.115 and later kernels"
• Maybe in reply to: Division by Zero: "Small problem with malloc() tested on 2.1.117/115 (and maybe affecting others)"