On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 08:27:51PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:
> I showed the kernel build segfaulting as an improvement over UML hanging,
> which is the alternative behavior.
Versus fully allocating the backing store, which would neither hang nor
cause segfaults. This is the behaviour that one expects by default, and
should be the first line of defense before going to the overcommit model.
Get that aspect of reliability in place, then add the overcommit support.
What is better: having uml fail before attempting to boot with an unable
to allocate backing store message, or a random oops during early kernel
init? As I see it, supporting the safe mode of operation first makes more
sense before adding yet another arch hook.
-ben
-- "A man with a bass just walked in, and he's putting it down on the floor." - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 07 2002 - 21:00:58 EST