[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > and since then (1999), most such panics, if they occurred, have been > caused by drivers passing e.g. uninitialized / unvalidated values into > kmem_alloc() - and were fixed by fixing the driver bug.
The distinction would be between considering -1 to be a design flaw on the part of the caller, or part of the input range requiring a valid response. > to allow KM_NOSLEEP users graceful recovery ? I think you might need to back up a bit: who is calling this caller? And where did the erroneous -1 come from originally? -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 _______________________________________________ opensolaris-code mailing list opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
