Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 2 Mar 2001 15:30:31 -0800
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_intr.c
Message-ID:  <20010302153031.I8663@fw.wintelcom.net>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.010302092252.jhb@FreeBSD.org>; from jhb@FreeBSD.org on Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 09:22:52AM -0800
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103022332480.11325-100000@besplex.bde.org> <XFMail.010302092252.jhb@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> [010302 09:23] wrote:
> 
> On 02-Mar-01 Bruce Evans wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, John Baldwin wrote:
> > 
> >> jhb         2001/03/01 22:07:39 PST
> >> 
> >>   Modified files:
> >>     sys/kern             kern_intr.c 
> >>   Log:
> >>   Ok, the kernel will panic in kmem_malloc() if the kernel map is full, so
> >>   malloc with M_WAITOK can't actually return NULL.  I wish I could get two
> >>   people to give me the same answer about this when I ask...
> > 
> > Erm, this (non-returning of malloc with M_WAITOK) is clearly documented
> > in malloc.9.  The panic is an implementation detail so it should not
> > be documented.  Maybe we should have a Great Renaming for malloc() like
> > we did for mtx_enter() to get rid of the evil flags :-).
> 
> Heh.  So officially for the final and last time:
> 
>              malloc() can only return NULL if M_NOWAIT is specified.

malloc(9) explains this, it's just a bit obtuse about it:

  "malloc() can only return NULL if M_NOWAIT is specified."

under the section explaining M_WAITOK.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010302153031.I8663>