Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:49:31 -0800 (PST)
From:      Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
To:        Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Cc:        current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: kernel malloc and M_CANWAIT 
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.990118124458.8525F-100000@current1.whistle.com>
In-Reply-To: <199901182020.MAA18399@dingo.cdrom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Mike Smith wrote:

> > 
> > Here at whistle we are trying to remember about a conversation
> > regarding malloc that occured recently. Maybe others can help.
> > 
> > There was some talk about the fact that malloc(..M_CANWAIT)
oops M_WAITOK..

> > can now return with a failure. Is that true?
> 
> Yes; it's necessary to do this to allow some chance of avoiding 
> deadlock.

I can't find this in the archives.. can you remember 
a keyword that would pull it up?

I've looked in..

The archives freebsd-current and freebsd-hackers contain the following
items relevant to `malloc AND M_WAITOK AND 1998'

(and similar)

It seems to me that there must be a lot of places where the
return value of MALLOC is not tested when M_WAITOK is set.
> 
> -- 
> \\  Sometimes you're ahead,       \\  Mike Smith
> \\  sometimes you're behind.      \\  mike@smith.net.au
> \\  The race is long, and in the  \\  msmith@freebsd.org
> \\  end it's only with yourself.  \\  msmith@cdrom.com
> 
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
> 


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



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.990118124458.8525F-100000>