Terry Lambert wrote:
> Peter Wemm wrote:
> > The bug is that things are calling things like malloc with M_WAITOK when
> > waiting is explicitly not allowed.  There are other functions that can
> > tsleep as well that we have not added checks for yet, so this is likely
> > just the tip of the iceberg.  :-(
> Why is this a problem?  M_WAITOK does not mean that it will wait
> indefinitely, even though you'd think it would mean that, given
> the name...
> I think _sleeping_ is a problem, but allocation with M_WAITOK
> shouldn't be, given it's strange definition of "waiting".  This
> is one of those hacks that John Baldwin was talking about earlier...

As you said, _sleeping_ is the problem.  M_WAITOK means "you may sleep if
you like".   ie: it is a time bomb waiting for the right low memory condition
which will then explode with a 100% authentic crash or lock up.

Pretend it said M_SLEEPOK instead of M_WAITOK.

"All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to