On Thu, 2002-07-18 at 15:35, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

On 18 Jul 2002, Robert Love wrote:

quoted

I should also mention this is demand paging, not overcommit.

Overcommit is the property of succeeded more allocations than their is
memory in the address space.  The idea being that allocations are lazy,
things often do not use their full allocations, etc. etc. as you
mentioned.

It is typical a good thing since it lowers VM pressure.

It is not always a good thing, for numerous reasons, and it becomes
important in those scenarios to ensure that all allocations can be met
by the backing store and consequently we never find ourselves with more
memory committed than available and thus never OOM.

This has nothing to do with paging and resource limits as you say.  Btw,
without this it is possible to OOM any machine.  OOM is a by-product of
allowing overcommit and poor accounting (and perhaps poor
software/users), not an incorrectly configured machine.

It has everything to do with demand-paging. Since on single CPU
machines, there is only one task executing at any one time, that
single task can own and use every bit of RAM on the whole machine
is virtual memory works correctly. For performance reasons, it
may not actually use all the RAM but, in principle, it is possible.

If you don't allow that, the single task can use only the RAM that
was not allocated to other tasks. At the time an allocation is made,
the kernel cannot know what resources may be available when the task
requesting the allocation actually starts to use those allocated
resources. Instead, the kernel allocates resources based upon what
it 'knows' at the present time. Since it can't see the future anymore
than you or I, the fact that N processes just called exit() before
the requesting task touched a single page can't be known.

FYI multiple CPU machines have compounded the problems because there
can be several things happening at the same time. Although the MM
is locked so it's single-threaded, you have a before/after resource 
history condition that can't be anticipated.

Cheers,
Dick Johnson

Is it possible that you're confusing "backing store" with "physical
RAM"?  I was under the impression that strict overcommit used both RAM
and SWAP when deciding whether an allocation should succeed.  If you've
exceeded all of RAM and all of swap, you are OOM.  Period.

Daniel

-- 
Recursion n.:
        See Recursion.
                        -- Random Shack Data Processing Dictionary


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/