re: Bumping default data size limit on amd64?

[matthew green <mrg%eterna.com.au@localhost>]

Robert Swindells writes:
> 
> Colin Percival <cperciva%tarsnap.com@localhost> wrote:
> >On 2017-02-03 06:52, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> >> When testing security/scrypt, the self tests fail with the default
> >> ulimits because one of the test needs 256MB. (After raising the data
> >> size ulimit, the test succeeds.)
> >> 
> >> Colin Percival suggests that we change the port's defaults here.
> >> 
> >> DFLDSIZ in arch/amd64/include/vmparam.h was last bumped back in 2004.
> >> 
> >> He suspects that this would have been increased a long time ago if it
> >> weren't for the fact that malloc allocates pages via mmap.
> >> 
> >> Anyway, opinions?
> >
> >Digging through my archives, I just found this email from two years ago.
> >It looks like nobody had any opinions at the time -- maybe we can take a
> >lack of objections as agreement and increase this value now?
> 
> There would probably have been more pressure to increase the default
> data size in NetBSD if we checked whether the total amount of mmaped
> memory was less than the limit rather than just checking each chunk.

netbsd never included the mmap space as data, and we explicitly
chose to implement RLIMIT_AS instead of tying mmap anon pages to
the RLIMIT_DATA limit.

that said, increasing default data limit seems fine by me.


.mrg.