Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Mar 2000 13:03:22 +0100 (CET) | From | Peter Svensson <> | Subject | Re: Overcomittable memory |
| |
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000, James Sutherland wrote:
> The only circumstance under which this change would have any effect is > where the kernel's "promise" is put to the test. With the current > behaviour, the promise COULD be broken. With your suggestion implemented, > it GUARANTEES that the problem occurs.
No, it allows the promise to be a firm one.
> So other than turning the remote possibility of a problem into a > guaranteed problem, the change achieves nothing. I don't think it'll make > it into the tree, then :-)
No, it makes sure that programs needing to know that the memory they have really is available will work. Most embedded systems are written with this in mind. I would imagine many special-purpose computers could use this as well (routers etc).
Peter -- Peter Svensson ! Pgp key available by finger, fingerprint: <petersv@psv.nu> ! 8A E9 20 98 C1 FF 43 E3 07 FD B9 0A 80 72 70 AF <petersv@df.lth.se> ! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Remember, Luke, your source will be with you... always...
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |