login
Header Space

 
 

Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Otto Moerbeek <otto@...>
Cc: <misc@...>
Date: Monday, May 19, 2008 - 8:38 am

Hi!

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 05:49:57PM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:


Any chance to get rid of that 1G limit that seems more and more
arbitrary nowadays? I remember reading that just upping that define in
/usr/src/sys/arch/i386/include/vmparam.h doesn't help, i.e. that
something else interacts with that parameter too. I know that on
processors that have neither PAE nor non-PAE NX support one might not be
able to protect all writable data from execution eventually, if a
program should in fact allocate more than 1G (once the kernel should
need to allocate it with lower virtual addresses). However, the kernel
could be made to prefer high addresses for writable, non-executable data
(mmap without PROT_EXEC), and the super-user is to decide on how she
sets up the data size resource limits, so if that's <= 1G the protection
should remain to be fine.


Kind regards,

Hannah.
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, David J. Stillman, (Thu May 8, 5:04 pm)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Otto Moerbeek, (Fri May 9, 2:44 am)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Otto Moerbeek, (Mon May 12, 11:49 am)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Hannah Schroeter, (Mon May 19, 8:38 am)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Ted Unangst, (Mon May 19, 4:20 pm)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Otto Moerbeek, (Mon May 19, 9:00 am)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Hannah Schroeter, (Mon May 19, 9:12 am)
Re: fsck large filesystem, memory limit problem, Otto Moerbeek, (Mon May 19, 9:48 am)
speck-geostationary