Hi, On Friday 23 September 2005 08:30, Nick Piggin wrote: > David S. Miller wrote: > >I'm sort-of concerned about this change: > > > > [PATCH] __kmalloc: Generate BUG if size requested is too large. > > > >it opens a can of worms, and stuff that used to generate > >-ENOMEM kinds of failures will now BUG() the kernel. > Making it WARN might be a good compromise. Which has the potential to spam the logs with a user triggerable event without even killing the responsible process. Same problem, just worse. I could live with a solution that enables it based on a config. KERNEL_HACKING is no such config. That feature is almost always enabled, because MAGIC_SYSRQ depends on it and a significant amount of Linux-Admins like it for a "sync, remount ro and reboot" sequence. So you need a new one. Regards Ingo Oeser
Attachment:
pgpQR4C0Okv8P.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- References:
- making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- From: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]>
- Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
- making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- Prev by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE][RFC] PlugSched-6.1.1 for 2.6.13 and 2.6.13-mm2
- Next by Date: [PATCH] vm - swap_prefetch-11
- Previous by thread: Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- Next by thread: Re: making kmalloc BUG() might not be a good idea
- Index(es):
