Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:59:42 +0000 From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm vm_kern.c Message-ID: <20040216185942.GP17809@chiark.greenend.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040216134648.63057L-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <200402161841.i1GIfwmv008267@repoman.freebsd.org> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1040216134648.63057L-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 01:55:51PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > > > > Don't panic if we fail to satisfy an M_WAITOK request; return 0 instead. > > The calling code will either handle that gracefully or cause a page fault. > > This substantially modifies the semantics of the two consumers of > kmem_malloc(), and those semantic changes trickle up the stack to a number > of important places. Are you going to update the consumers (and their > comments) as well? ISTR that the whole point of M_WAITOK when it was introduced was that callers could rely on the fact that it would not return NULL. Tony. -- f.a.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ RATTRAY HEAD TO BERWICK ON TWEED: WEST 2 OR 3 INCREASING NORTHWEST 4 OR 5 LOCALLY 6 THEN DECREASING 3 LOCALLY 4 OR 5. PATCHY RAIN AT FIRST, THEN FINE AND DRY. GENERALLY GOOD, BUT PERHAPS LOCALLY MODERATE IN RAIN. SLIGHT.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040216185942.GP17809>