From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sat Jun 2 23:53:17 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D173DFD1ABA for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:53:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wr0-x234.google.com (mail-wr0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEF9581726 for ; Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:53:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-wr0-x234.google.com with SMTP id v13-v6so27887697wrp.13 for ; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 16:53:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wEr+MXS/5LZoN8NQeUe1NbGZMyeJk41hxi+/9wULs8E=; b=sjoYIWtVq/wzIBT/gzvWyKHEj0F2P0Gl5w2ML68RcJpXgkn3I58tKbQDqYeTo1Zol0 oPw5gE0nqr2Gz9WoUUVRwoQHwRWa0YmLzaMhX/1CTLiFUfW5gtVhOKRzATO7pcxzWRZg 41A4FDeqYfxQ5P1nNZzWNQDpO6jV3eM3BZ7+NHygr5Vae+DtUQCHCXofXcdOtDrFm1Ft k/ouCcvAk+ybWrO0dDdFBo3cpNVtRJnjC1yvLstVMwgjYZ55dxq4QGHcFDRB+YJJGj94 zaSbWKW0rZBV2BkLLPLsaAVFNBJLmIdra7pIcHJ4WZ3tZbCqsbsQjgqR57WA/C53FpHE BZAA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPweg6SKiW4AQFTz0KVP7lDR96c0LPydMoPo+uxdvq8tQu1Kf6JaD o16rOl+4REre8TnQ+VKli5/bZQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJ/M6kvFay78f0bzf5Enzv/W1hnOe9gJ0RVf1XQE0a/kAfR3F+IBCK2iEENV/mXDKqBFbO2Fw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f5c8:: with SMTP id k8-v6mr11141764wrp.219.1527983594429; Sat, 02 Jun 2018 16:53:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com ([90.211.23.147]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v2-v6sm2691023wrm.84.2018.06.02.16.53.13 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sat, 02 Jun 2018 16:53:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2018 00:53:11 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is it normal that a user can take down the whole system by using too much memory? Message-ID: <20180603005311.5768a2d7@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20180603004634.5865434d@gumby.homeunix.com> References: <1527977770.2651378.1394286400.0806CC5C@webmail.messagingengine.com> <01EE7EEA-03AC-4D71-BA08-B0CEA97EE720@thehowies.com> <1527981931.2670335.1394316280.09410FC9@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20180603004634.5865434d@gumby.homeunix.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd11.1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2018 23:53:18 -0000 On Sun, 3 Jun 2018 00:46:34 +0100 RW wrote: > On Sat, 02 Jun 2018 19:25:31 -0400 > Brennan Vincent wrote: > > > > I'm also curious, however, to learn more from an OS design > > perspective. Why isn't it possible for the kernel to realize it > > should kill `eatmem` rather than make the system unusable? > > I did something similar a few years ago, and the process was reliably > killed. I should have added that that was without virtualization, or ZFS.