From owner-freebsd-current Mon Jan 18 12:24:02 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA04376 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:24:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles250.castles.com [208.214.165.250]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA04371 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:24:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA18399; Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:20:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199901182020.MAA18399@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Julian Elischer cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernel malloc and M_CANWAIT In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 18 Jan 1999 11:38:39 PST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 12:20:34 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > Here at whistle we are trying to remember about a conversation > regarding malloc that occured recently. Maybe others can help. > > There was some talk about the fact that malloc(..M_CANWAIT) > can now return with a failure. Is that true? Yes; it's necessary to do this to allow some chance of avoiding deadlock. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message