cvs commit: src/sys/vm vm_kern.c

Mike Silbersack silby at
Mon Feb 16 12:01:35 PST 2004

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004, Robert Watson wrote:

> getting somewhere.  I'm not sure what the right answer in procfs is, but I
> think this isn't it.  Maybe we need a new M_flag that says "And fail if
> it's rediculous", but I'm very concerned that we just substituted memory
> allocation semantics throughout the kernel and the impact it will have...
> It could be harmless, but it's also not a change to make without a lot of
> hard cogitation.
> Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
> robert at      Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research

If maintaining the old semantics is important, then adding a third flag
sounds like the way to go.  Unfortunately, I can't think of something
appropriate that would fit into the form M_XXXXXX.

I'm only jumping in because I had considered making a change similar to
DES's back when I was investigating why the old pipe code could panic the
machine; the current situation of panic vs NOWAIT is very frustrating.

Mike "Silby" Silbersack

More information about the cvs-src mailing list