On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote:
quoted text
> David Newall wrote:
>>
>> Vegard Nossum wrote:
>>>
>>> It turns out that swap over loop device on tmpfs will lock up the
>>> machine.
>>
>> Doesn't tmpfs use otherwise-free virtual memory?  I expect the machine
>> would lock up if you put swap (i.e. additional virtual memory) on such a
>> device.
>
> To reinstate the paragraph from the O.P. you snipped:
>>> I'm not sure it's really a very good idea to do this in the first
>>> place, but should something give a warning or prevent a user from
>>> doing it?
>
> I think you are both right, it is a bad thing to do, it does seem to lock
> up, and something should prevent a user from doing that. But it may be
> easier to fix the lockup than get the "prevent" right, there appears to be a
> loop there.
>
> Just a simple questions to the O.P.: what were you thinking?!! Or was this a
> test just to see what would happen?

Just playing with the kernel :-)

Sometimes the "insane" things to do will turn up real errors in the
code. This one is in the borderlands, but I thought it wouldn't hurt
to post the results in either case.


Vegard

-- 
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
	-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
--
unsubscribe notice
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/