* nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2011-01-13 10:57:41]: > Hi. > > On Wed, 12 Jan 2011 18:40:37 +0300 > Evgeniy Ivanov <lolkaantimat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > When I forbid memory overcommiting, malloc() returns 0 if can't > > reserve memory, but in a cgroup it will always succeed, when it can > > succeed when not in the group. > > E.g. I've set 2 to overcommit_memory, limit is 10M: I can ask malloc > > 100M and it will not return any error (kernel is 2.6.32). > > Is it expected behavior? > > > Yes. Because memory cgroup can be used for limiting the memory(and swap) size > which is physically used, not the malloc'ed size. > I had rlimit based cgroup to limit virtual memory size, but the patches were never merged due to lack of use cases :( See http://lwn.net/Articles/283287/ I did advocate as use case the ability to prevent overcommit. I suspect another way of solving this problem is to have overcommit control. The problem today is that OOM is our backup to overcommit, not a very comfortable feeling. -- Three Cheers, Balbir -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom policy in Canada: sign http://dissolvethecrtc.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>