Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 22:59:46 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Alex Kozlov <spam@rm-rf.kiev.ua>, Mikhail Teterin <mi+kde@aldan.algebra.com> Subject: Re: panic: kmem_malloc(16384): kmem_map too small: md-mounted /tmp filled up Message-ID: <20070305035945.GA71660@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20070304075946.GH40430@comp.chem.msu.su> References: <20070227205351.GA72597@ravenloft.kiev.ua> <200702271603.30481@aldan> <20070304075946.GH40430@comp.chem.msu.su>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Sun, Mar 04, 2007 at 10:59:46AM +0300, Yar Tikhiy wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 04:03:30PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 February 2007 15:53, Alex Kozlov wrote: > > = > Yes, I switched to swap-backed md already. But the malloc-based variety is > > = > currently the _default_ (see /etc/defaults/rc.conf)... > > = Bad default. > > > > Filing a PR. > > Keep in mind that changing the default can break existing setups. > Such setups are likely to be broken anyway, but... E.g., if we > drop the -M flag, it will break systems with tons of RAM but little > swap using tmpmfs. How will it break them? swap backing only touches swap if there is memory pressure, i.e. precisely the situation in which malloc backing will panic. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFF65WxWry0BWjoQKURAuITAJ9wBrTFahsWSQJu+WgTByF46aq3uQCg+qkA yoeu3s4iju7hHWKy7BEx/0A= =y8Ta -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070305035945.GA71660>