Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 04 Apr 2012 10:07:26 -0700 | From | KOSAKI Motohiro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2) |
| |
(4/4/12 9:43 AM), Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:38, KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote: >> As far as I understand, any major open source project don't use >> posix_spawn(). >> Please remind, I'm talking about real world issue. > > This doesn't mean they shouldn't. If you require code to be changed > anyway let them change to something which doesn't require more cruft > in the kernel. The limitations you cited are irrelevant for > posix_spawn. And perhaps there will be actually spawn support in the > kernel which would make dealing with OOM situations and non-overcommit > much easier.
Umm... I'm sorry. I haven't catch why OOM is related topic. Could you please elaborate more?
| |