On Tue, 2023-05-16 at 06:33 -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > Rudolf Leitgeb <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Lots of people (including myself) come from linux background and use > > OpenBSD for specific security sensitive tasks. Since OpenBSD, like > > every other desktop&server OS these days, has some strategy to deal > > with OOM conditions, the term "OOM killer" is perfectly clear > > regardless of what the actual implementation in OpenBSD is called. > > But it has strategy like that. > > If you run it out of memory plus swap, it will deadlock. This situation > must be prevented by establishing resource limits ahead of time, which > we ship with pretty strict defaults.
Well, then the stategy is not to have a strategy, which is perfectly fine. It still doesn't matter for the use case under discussion here. The "bug" reporter expected some OOM type situation, and didn't observe any, because the reported "memory leak" does not exist. Case closed, original bug report in the "rejected" queue, bug reporter educated about file system cache.
