Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:01:41 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
To:        seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach)
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Setting memory allocators for library functions. 
Message-ID:  <200102252201.f1PM1fY00967@billy-club.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 25 Feb 2001 09:59:02 CST." <200102251559.f1PFx2627103@guild.plethora.net> 
References:  <200102251559.f1PFx2627103@guild.plethora.net>  

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200102251559.f1PFx2627103@guild.plethora.net> Peter Seebach writes:
: In message <3A98EE37.7B0B6CE0@newsguy.com>, "Daniel C. Sobral" writes:
: >OTOH, the *only* way to get non-overcommit to FreeBSD is for someone who
: >*wants* that feature to sit down and code it. It won't happen otherwise.
: 
: So, out of idle curiousity:  If, somewhere down the road, I know the kernel
: well enough to attempt such a thing, what would the interest level be in
: merging such a feature?

Assuming that it doesn't break anything, that it doesn't introduce a
severe performance penalty and works, there would be interest.  There
are times that this is a desirable feature.

Warner

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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102252201.f1PM1fY00967>