Re: Pre-allocation of shared memory ...

I know he does -  *but* I think it has probably been wiped out by accident
somewhere along the line (like when they went to 2.4.20?)

Here's what's in RH sources - tell me after you look that I am looking in
the wrong place. (Or did RH get cute and decide to do this only for the AS
product?)

first, RH7.3/kernel 2.4.18-3 (patch present):

----------------
int vm_enough_memory(long pages, int charge)
{       /* Stupid algorithm to decide if we have enough memory: while        * simple, it hopefully works in most
obviouscases.. Easy to        * fool it, but this should catch most mistakes.        *        * 23/11/98 NJC: Somewhat
lessstupid version of algorithm,        * which tries to do "TheRightThing".  Instead of using half of        *
(buffers+cache),use the minimum values.  Allow an extra 2%        * of num_physpages for safety margin.        *
*2002/02/26 Alan Cox: Added two new modes that do real accounting        */       unsigned long free, allowed;
structsysinfo i;
 
       if(charge)               atomic_add(pages, &vm_committed_space);
       /* Sometimes we want to use more memory than we have. */       if (sysctl_overcommit_memory == 1)
return1;       if (sysctl_overcommit_memory == 0)       {               /* The page cache contains buffer pages these
days..*/               free = atomic_read(&page_cache_size);               free += nr_free_pages();               free
+=nr_swap_pages;
 
               /*                * This double-counts: the nrpages are both in the
page-cache                * and in the swapper space. At the same time, this
compensates                * for the swap-space over-allocation (ie "nr_swap_pages"
being                * too small.                */               free += swapper_space.nrpages;
               /*                * The code below doesn't account for free space in the
inode                * and dentry slab cache, slab cache fragmentation, inodes
and                * dentries which will become freeable under VM load, etc.                * Lets just hope all these
(complex)factors balance out...                */               free += (dentry_stat.nr_unused * sizeof(struct dentry))
>>
PAGE_SHIFT;               free += (inodes_stat.nr_unused * sizeof(struct inode)) >>
PAGE_SHIFT;
               if(free > pages)                       return 1;               atomic_sub(pages, &vm_committed_space);
           return 0;       }       allowed = total_swap_pages;
 
       if(sysctl_overcommit_memory == 2)       {               /* FIXME - need to add arch hooks to get the bits we
need                 without the higher overhead crap */               si_meminfo(&i);               allowed +=
i.totalram>> 1;       }       if(atomic_read(&vm_committed_space) < allowed)               return 1;       if(charge)
           atomic_sub(pages, &vm_committed_space);       return 0;
 

}
---------
and here's what's in RH9/2.4.20-18 (patch absent):
--------------
int vm_enough_memory(long pages)
{       /* Stupid algorithm to decide if we have enough memory: while        * simple, it hopefully works in most
obviouscases.. Easy to        * fool it, but this should catch most mistakes.        */       /* 23/11/98 NJC: Somewhat
lessstupid version of algorithm,        * which tries to do "TheRightThing".  Instead of using half of        *
(buffers+cache),use the minimum values.  Allow an extra 2%        * of num_physpages for safety margin.        */
 
       unsigned long free;
       /* Sometimes we want to use more memory than we have. */       if (sysctl_overcommit_memory)           return
1;
       /* The page cache contains buffer pages these days.. */       free = atomic_read(&page_cache_size);       free
+=nr_free_pages();       free += nr_swap_pages;
 
       /*        * This double-counts: the nrpages are both in the page-cache        * and in the swapper space. At the
sametime, this compensates        * for the swap-space over-allocation (ie "nr_swap_pages" being        * too small.
   */       free += swapper_space.nrpages;
 
       /*        * The code below doesn't account for free space in the inode        * and dentry slab cache, slab
cachefragmentation, inodes and        * dentries which will become freeable under VM load, etc.        * Lets just hope
allthese (complex) factors balance out...        */       free += (dentry_stat.nr_unused * sizeof(struct dentry)) >>
 
PAGE_SHIFT;       free += (inodes_stat.nr_unused * sizeof(struct inode)) >>
PAGE_SHIFT;
       return free > pages;
}

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: "Kurt Roeckx" <Q@ping.be>; "Matthew Kirkwood"
<matthew@hairy.beasts.org>; <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Pre-allocation of shared memory ...


> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> > I *know* the latest RH kernel docs *say* they have paranoid mode that
> > supposedly guarantees against OOM - it was me that pointed that out
> > originally :-). I just checked on the latest sources (today it's RH8,
kernel
> > 2.4.20-18.8) to be doubly sure, and can't see the patches.
>
> I think you must be looking in the wrong place.  Red Hat's kernels have
> included the mode 2/3 overcommit logic since RHL 7.3, according to
> what I can find.  (Don't forget Alan Cox works for Red Hat ;-).)
>
> But it is true that it's not in Linus' tree yet.  This may be because
> there are still some loose ends.  The copy of the overcommit document
> in my RHL 8.0 system lists some ToDo items down at the bottom:
>
> To Do
> -----
> o       Account ptrace pages (this is hard)
> o       Disable MAP_NORESERVE in mode 2/3
> o       Account for shared anonymous mappings properly
>         - right now we account them per instance
>
> I have not installed RHL 9 yet --- is the ToDo list any shorter there?
>
> regards, tom lane