Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!news.funet.fi!funic!fuug!demos!dvv
From: dvv@hq.demos.su (Dmitry V. Volodin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.internals
Subject: Re: whay can't processes shrink as well as grow?
Message-ID: <1990Oct11.092721.4118@hq.demos.su>
Date: 11 Oct 90 09:27:21 GMT
References: <1990Oct3.225943.4691@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au> <PCG.90Oct10212600@odin.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Reply-To: dvv@hq.demos.su (Dmitry V. Volodin)
Organization: DEMOS, Moscow, USSR
Lines: 15

In article <PCG.90Oct10212600@odin.cs.aber.ac.uk> pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
>Now there is a catch: even if your storage reclaimer detectes that a
>block of memory just under the break has become free, and lowers the
>break as a result, in many UNIX kernels this regrettably will not
>release any pages to the kernel mmeory pool -- in some it will not even
>invalidate page table entries beyond the break. This is probably because

More of that - in some paging evnvironments brk() is a dummy! When
the process addresses memory beyond the brk level the kernel just adds
another one page to porcess's memory pool.

-- 
Dmitry V. Volodin <dvv@hq.demos.su>     |
fax:    +7 095 233 5016                 |      Call me Dima (D-'ee-...)
phone:  +7 095 231 2129                 |