Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > Would it be costly/reasonable to have kmalloc -not- panic if given a
> > > too-large size? Principle of Least Surprises says it should return NULL
> > > at the very least.
> >
> > It's on purpose; to find the erroneous drivers.
>
> Unfortunately Linus forgot to provide a way to check if a kmalloc is too
> large so the drivers cannot work around it. Dave put an incredibly ugly
> constant assumption in af_unix for this and no doubt more will follow.
>
> So -ac added the constant
>
What about removing the BUG?
I means all drivers should be aware that kmalloc() > 16 kB fail quite
often.
kmalloc() over 128 kB always fail.
Do you really prefer if drivers contain a
static inline void* safe_kmalloc(size, flags)
{
if(size > LIMIT)
return NULL;
return kmalloc(size, flags);
}
-- Manfred - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 21:00:17 EST