Re: mlock() issues

[Sad Clouds <cryintothebluesky%googlemail.com@localhost>]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:02:53 +0200
Michael van Elst <mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost> wrote:

> The UVM limit is global to all processes, obviously there should
> be such a limit to keep the system provided with unlocked pages.
> 
> You could probably make this configurable, but so far nobody had
> the need to lock a large part of memory and to adjust that limit.

Well I accept that you need some unlocked pages to keep things running,
however hardcoding the limit to 1/3 is a bit extreme. I thought this
was the whole point of sysctl/rlimit settings, i.e. I'm running as
root, I know what I'm doing, if I want to lock 95% of physical memory,
then let me do it.

Anyway, thanks for demystifying the issue.