[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 10:07:26 -0700
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nextfd(2)
(4/4/12 9:43 AM), Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 12:38, KOSAKI Motohiro<kosaki.motohiro@...il.com> wrote:
>> As far as I understand, any major open source project don't use
>> posix_spawn().
>> Please remind, I'm talking about real world issue.
>
> This doesn't mean they shouldn't. If you require code to be changed
> anyway let them change to something which doesn't require more cruft
> in the kernel. The limitations you cited are irrelevant for
> posix_spawn. And perhaps there will be actually spawn support in the
> kernel which would make dealing with OOM situations and non-overcommit
> much easier.
Umm... I'm sorry. I haven't catch why OOM is related topic. Could you please
elaborate more?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists