From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jan  4 13:12:59 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14F0116A594;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 13:12:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C313213C4DD;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 13:12:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no)
Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB1720A0;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 14:12:50 +0100 (CET)
X-Spam-Tests: AWL
X-Spam-Learn: disabled
X-Spam-Score: -0.2/3.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no
Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180])
	by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4150B207E;
	Fri,  4 Jan 2008 14:12:50 +0100 (CET)
Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001)
	id 28097844CD; Fri,  4 Jan 2008 14:12:50 +0100 (CET)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To: "Igor Mozolevsky" <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk>
References: <86myrlahee.fsf@ds4.des.no> <5647.1199451237@critter.freebsd.dk>
	<a2b6592c0801040503j650046f5k73895b5b0c84025d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 14:12:50 +0100
In-Reply-To: <a2b6592c0801040503j650046f5k73895b5b0c84025d@mail.gmail.com>
	(Igor Mozolevsky's message of "Fri\, 4 Jan 2008 13\:03\:01 +0000")
Message-ID: <86abnlag4t.fsf@ds4.des.no>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
	Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: sbrk(2) broken
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:12:59 -0000

"Igor Mozolevsky" <igor@hybrid-lab.co.uk> writes:
> This makes memory management in the userland hideously and
> unnecessarily complicated. It's simpler to have SIGDANGER [...]

You don't seem to understand what Poul-Henning was trying to point out,
which is that broadcasting SIGDANGER can make a bad situation much, much
worse by waking up and paging in every single process in the system,
including processes that are blocked and wouldn't otherwise run for
several minutes, hours or even days (getty, inetd, sshd, mountd, even
nfsd / nfsiod in some cases can sleep for days at a time waiting for
I/O)

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no