On Fri, 04 Jan 2008, Andrey Chernov wrote:That won't help much -- malloc could have allocated some address space that hasn't (yet) been touched by the process. Just returning 0 when the amount of memory "in use" hits a limit wouldn't stop the process from then touching all the memory it has previously been allocated and exceeding the limit. -- David Taylor _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
| Justin C. Sherrill | Re: pkgsrc bulk build and tiff |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.27-rc5 |
| Ingo Molnar | [crash, bisected] Kernel BUG at ffffffff8079afb1 (__netif_schedule()) |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
| Evgeniy Polyakov | Re: tbench wrt. loopback TSO |
