From owner-freebsd-hackers  Mon Jul 19  9:41:10 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF5014E26
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 19 Jul 1999 09:40:50 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no)
Received: (from des@localhost)
	by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.1) id SAA83917;
	Mon, 19 Jul 1999 18:39:16 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from des)
To: "Kelly Yancey" <kbyanc@alcnet.com>
Cc: "Dag-Erling Smorgrav" <des@flood.ping.uio.no>,
	<freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Overcommit and calloc()
References: <001f01bed205$e8aeecc0$291c453f@kbyanc.alcnet.com>
From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>
Date: 19 Jul 1999 18:39:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: "Kelly Yancey"'s message of "Mon, 19 Jul 1999 12:44:03 -0400"
Message-ID: <xzpyagclhl8.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>
Lines: 10
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

"Kelly Yancey" <kbyanc@alcnet.com> writes:
>   Ahh...but wouldn't the bzero() touch all of the memory just allocated
> functionally making it non-overcommit?

No. If it were an "non-overcomitting malloc", it would return NULL and
set errno to ENOMEM, instead of dumping core.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message