Re: overcommit verses MAP_NORESERVE

From: Nicholas Miell (nmiell_at_comcast.net)
Date: 08/08/05

  • Next message: Tony Lindgren: "Re: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3" 
    To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:22:57 -0700

    On Sun, 2005-08-07 at 12:49 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
    > On Sad, 2005-08-06 at 20:52 -0700, Nicholas Miell wrote:
    > > Why does overcommit in mode 2 (OVERCOMMIT_NEVER) explicitly force
    > > MAP_NORESERVE mappings to reserve memory?
    > >
    > > My understanding is that MAP_NORESERVE is a way for apps to state that
    > > they are aware that the memory allocated may not exist and that they
    > > might get a SIGSEGV and that's OK with them.
    >
    > Because a MAP_NORESERVE space that is filled with pages might cause
    > insufficient memory to be left available for another object that is not
    > MAP_NORESERVE.
    >
    > You are right it could be improved but that would require someone
    > writing code that forcibly reclaimed MAP_NORESERVE objects when we were
    > close to out of memory. At the moment nobody has done this, but nothing
    > is stopping someone having a go.

    I don't think you can forcibly reclaim MAP_NORESERVE objects (I'm
    assuming you mean completely throwing away dirty pages).

    MAP_NORESERVE isn't standardized, so all we can go by is what everybody
    else does (and what makes the most sense).

    Based on the Linux and Solaris man pages (none of FreeBSD, Irix, HP-UX,
    or AIX implement anything similar), I think calls to mmap() with
    MAP_NORESERVE should always succeed (regardless of memory conditions,
    not other errors) and individual writes to unallocated pages in a
    MAP_NORESERVE region should either allocate a new page if possible or
    send a SIGSEGV without triggering the OOM killer. 

    -- 
Nicholas Miell <nmiell@comcast.net>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
  • Next message: Tony Lindgren: "Re: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: will the memory allocated by malloc get released when program exits?
      ... Always free all memory you allocate. ... Let's examine for a moment how one can come across a SIGSEGV: ... why one should not allocate or free memory within a SIGSEGV handler. ... But it's the undefined behavior that's the underlying problem. ...
      (comp.lang.c)
    • Interrupt handler seems not to be called in GNAT 3.15p
      ... When accessing memory, I might not have access to some memory location. ... I can see SIGSEGV being raised. ... it is not passed to my interrupt handler, ...
      (comp.lang.ada)
    • [Question] Can we release vma that include code when one process is running?
      ... We think this make system speed up on PC that more little memory. ... more easier.We found, if we try swap out openoffice.org, this way can ... I will get a SIGSEGV! ... send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: Serious compatibility breakage in -current.
      ... more POSIXly correct, provided that he interpreted POSIX correctly; ... Write attempts to memory that was mapped without write access, ... References to unmapped addresses shall result in a SIGSEGV signal. ... shall result in a SIGBUS signal. ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: SIGSEGV handler Question
      ... SIGSEGV, and handles the fault by changing the virtual address the ... readable or perform a memory mapping on this address inside the signal ... one memory reference, but also the code that generated the memory ...
      (comp.os.linux.development.apps)