Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 17:09:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: phk@phk.freebsd.dk Subject: Re: [BIKESHED] Giving abort(2) a reason Message-ID: <200409130009.i8D09cup093302@apollo.backplane.com> References: <20040912.152047.16265436.imp@bsdimp.com> <20040912.153323.115746063.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
:...
:: >:
:: >: syslog() or anything else using varargs is not going to work...
:: >
:: >Wouldn't it be better to have a more generic 'Put this into dmesg'
:: >thing that doesn't require malloc to work? It seems silly to bloat
:: >the kernel for only a malloc failure case...
::
:: That is what I thought I proposed...
:
:You proposed 'put this into dmesg, with a lot of other stuff and then
:abort the program.' I was wanting 'put this into dmesg' and nothing
:else...
:
:Warner
I like the idea of an abort2() [though I wish it were named something
else] but I see no need for it to be made a system call. It simply
would not be appropriate... abort2() does not do anything that couldn't
be done in userland (even if malloc is non-operational at the time).
A system call would be a hack to avoid having to clean up the related
libc functions and/or provide a path through libc to implement the
feature (perhaps a special syslogx() call).
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<dillon@backplane.com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200409130009.i8D09cup093302>