No problem. Thanks for your reply. Bharat ________________________________________ From: Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2025 06:02 PM To: Bharat Agrawal <bharat.agrawal@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: hughd@xxxxxxxxxx <hughd@xxxxxxxxxx>; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx>; zhangyiru3@xxxxxxxxxx <zhangyiru3@xxxxxxxxxx>; liuzixian4@xxxxxxxxxx <liuzixian4@xxxxxxxxxx>; mhocko@xxxxxxxx <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>; wuxu.wu@xxxxxxxxxx <wuxu.wu@xxxxxxxxxx>; linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>; legion@xxxxxxxxxx <legion@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: mlock ulimits for SHM_HUGETLB [External Sender] On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 12:04:58PM +0000, Bharat Agrawal wrote: > Thanks Greg for the response. RHEL has not been very helpful. I'm not looking to ask for patches because of the old versions. > These messages appear in production runs, raising concerns about possible failures. Thus, the question is: Can they be ignored safely? Again, you are paying them for support for this, please use them, there is nothing that the community can do to help out here, sorry. greg k-h
