Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 20:29:12 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: sysctl from Linux (*envy*) Message-ID: <19980425202912.47672@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <199804251631.MAA08608@rtfm.ziplink.net>; from Mikhail Teterin on Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 12:31:47PM -0400 References: <19980425182642.30642@follo.net> <199804251631.MAA08608@rtfm.ziplink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 25, 1998 at 12:31:47PM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > Eivind Eklund once stated: > > => Wait. Then, I'm confused. Does linux's overcommit_memory affect kernel > => or libc's malloc? > > =kernel. > = > =It stop the kernel from giving out page-mappings it doesn't have > =backing for. > > Oh, so, strictly speaking, it does not have much to do with malloc > at all, but rather with sbrk(2)? Your initial posting confused me. Just to clarify: My initial posting was a quote from the Linux documentation, with a two-line comment at the end of my own. Basically, what would be nice was a model where one could avoid memory overcommit, both on an entire system and on a process-by-process basis. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980425202912.47672>