On 04/17/2014 12:41 PM, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 20:05:34 +0200 Manfred Spraul <manfred@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 04/02/2014 12:08 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
Well, I'm assuming 64GB==infinity. It *was* infinity in the RHEL5
timeframe, but infinity has since become larger so pickanumber.
I think infinity is the right solution:
The only common case where infinity is wrong would be Android - and
Android disables sysv shm entirely.
There are two patches:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=139730332306185&q=raw
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=139727299800644&q=raw
Could you apply one of them?
I wrote the first one, thus I'm biased which one is better.
I like your patch because applying it might encourage you to send more
kernel patches - I miss the old days ;)
But I do worry about disrupting existing systems so I like Davidlohr's
idea of making the change a no-op for people who are currently
explicitly setting shmmax and shmall.
Agreed. It's hard to imagine situations where people might care
nowadays, but there's no limits to people's insane inventiveness. Some
people really might want to set an upper limit.
I don't understand that: neither patch has any impact after an explicit
sysctl that overwrites shmmax.
In an ideal world, system administrators would review this change,
And in the ideal world, patches such as this would CC
linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, as described in
Documentation/SubmitChecklist, so that users who care about getting
advance warning on API changes could be alerted and might even review
and comment...
Good point.
Davidlohr: Your patch has an impact on shmctl(,IPC_INFO,).
Could you add that for v3?
I'll try to make a v2 (with your update to the uapi header file) tomorrow.
--
Manfred
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>