![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Ingo Oeser wrote: > Hi, > > On Friday 23 September 2005 08:30, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>David S. Miller wrote: >> >>>I'm sort-of concerned about this change: >>> >>> [PATCH] __kmalloc: Generate BUG if size requested is too large. >>> >>>it opens a can of worms, and stuff that used to generate >>>-ENOMEM kinds of failures will now BUG() the kernel. >> >>Making it WARN might be a good compromise. > > > Which has the potential to spam the logs with a user triggerable event > without even killing the responsible process. > Same problem, just worse. > As opposed to potentially taking the system down? I don't think so. > I could live with a solution that enables it based on a config. > Then you'll get people not enabling it on real workloads, or tuning it off if it bugs them. No, the point of having a WARN there is really for people like SGI to detect a few rare failure cases when they first boot up their 1024+ CPU systems. It is not going to spam anyone's logs (and if it does it *needs* fixing). What you don't want is to kill the responsible process, because at that point they're deep in the kernel, probably holding other locks and resources. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-09-23 08:01 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||