On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 07:26:39PM -0400, Eric S. Raymond wrote: > Hal Murray <hmur...@megapathdsl.net>: > > I think you have extrapolated from some modern systems to our whole target > > environment. I don't remember any discussion supporting memlock not being > > interesting/important. > > There were actually two threads about this attached to memlock-related bug > reports in Classic. They initially thought memlocking was important, then > figured out it wasn't. Matt Selsky has been following those bugs; he and I > discussed the issue on #ntpsec.
"rlimit memlock 0" using Classic causes ntpd to died after 3 minutes with this error 2016-06-29T00:13:21.903+00:00 host.example.com ntpd[27206]: libgcc_s.so.1 must be installed for pthread_cancel to work I've attached 15 minute graphs for "rlimit memlock -1" and "rlimit memlock 128" using Classic. Locking memory seems to result in more stable graphs over the time period that I was able to collect quickly. Cheers, -Matt
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
