Re: A true story of a crash.
R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl, Rogier Wolff (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon, 17 Aug 1998 14:27:21 +0200 (MEST)
Michael Driscoll wrote:
> >Well, this overcommitment is fine in some cases, and not in others. A
> >kernel option that enables the no overcommit case would be nice for
> >some people.
> >The argument FOR overcommitting memory is:
> > Almost nobody check the malloc return values. And if they do, all
> > they do is bomb out with "out of memory". If you keep such a
> > process, it might even run to completion.
> There are people out there who don't check the return of malloc()? Yuck.
> I've *always* made it a habit to define my own xmalloc() which bombs with
> an error messages on malloc() return of NULL. If there are people who
> don't check the return of malloc(), then they get what's coming to then
> (unpredictable crashes in heavy load, for one).
You see, that's what I meant. Instead of bombing out with a segmentation
fault core dumped, your program bombs out with a "malloc failed".
It is slightly more informative, but doesn't buy the user
anything. Application quit. Period.
| The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can | R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl
| fake that, you've got it made. -- Jean Giraudoux | T: +31-15-2137555
- Custom Linux device drivers for sale! Call for a quote. - F: +31-15-2138217
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html