Re: %u-order allocation failed

From: Pavel Machek (pavel@suse.cz)
Date: Tue Oct 09 2001 - 04:45:48 EST

Next message: Ivan Kokshaysky: "Re: [patch 2.4.11-pre5] atomic_dec_and_lock() for alpha"
Previous message: Marco Berizzi: "Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)"
In reply to: Mikulas Patocka: "Re: %u-order allocation failed"
Next in thread: Linus Torvalds: "Re: %u-order allocation failed"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi!

> > > Linus, what do you think: is it OK if fork randomly fails with very small
> > > probability or not?
> >
> > Your code doesnt change that behaviour. Not one iota. Do the mathematics,
> > work out the failure probabilities for page pairs. Now remember that the
> > vmalloc one has guard pages too.
> >
> > You are trying to solve a non problem with a non solution
>
> I asked Linus, not you :-/
>
> It's up to him, if he wants "stability-based-on-probability" algorithms in
> Linux or not.

You ignored comment about guard pages.
Pavel

-- 
Casualities in World Trade Center: 6453 dead inside the building,
cryptography in U.S.A. and free speech in Czech Republic.
-
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/

Next message: Ivan Kokshaysky: "Re: [patch 2.4.11-pre5] atomic_dec_and_lock() for alpha"
Previous message: Marco Berizzi: "Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)"
In reply to: Mikulas Patocka: "Re: %u-order allocation failed"
Next in thread: Linus Torvalds: "Re: %u-order allocation failed"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 15 2001 - 21:00:23 EST