Hi Pekka, Arjan,
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 18:52:02 +0200
Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> wrote:
| On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 18:38 +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
| > > Looks good to me. Arjan, you had some objections last time around. Are
| > > you okay with the change?
|
| On Mon, 2006-01-23 at 17:44 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
| > I still fail to see the point. Has anyone EVER seen these trigger????
|
| Yeah, we probably won't. They seem useful for people who hunt unchecked
| kmalloc() calls, though.
It really looks useful to me. You don't check for fail because someone has
seen the fail happen. You check for fail in order to have a robust program.
There are zilions of checks in the kernel and in programs out there which I
think they will never fail. But they are there.
On the other hand, I'm not going to make too much noise for a such trivial
patch. If you think it's not useful, let's drop it. No problem.
--
Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
