From owner-freebsd-current  Sat May  8 18:30:46 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.9])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E8CC151CA
	for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat,  8 May 1999 18:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au)
Received: (from bde@localhost)
	by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA13409;
	Sun, 9 May 1999 11:29:19 +1000
Date: Sun, 9 May 1999 11:29:19 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199905090129.LAA13409@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: imp@harmony.village.org, luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it
Subject: Re: m_get(M_WAIT, ...) _can_ return NULL ?
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

>: 	m = m_get(M_WAIT, ...)
>: looking at the code, it seems that m_get() _can_ return a NULL pointer
>: even if one specifies M_WAIT.
>
>Looking at the man page for malloc:
>     M_WAITOK
>             indicates that it is Ok to wait for resources.  It is unconve-
>             niently defined as 0 so care should be taken never to compare
>             against this value directly or try to AND it as a flag.  The de-
>             fault operation is to block until the memory allocation succeeds.
>             malloc() can only return NULL if M_NOWAIT is specified.
>
>Sounds like a bug to me.

Er,

m_get != malloc
M_WAIT != M_WAITOK

Bruce


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