> I think this patch should be reverted. If somebody is vmallocing crazy > amounts of memory in the exit path we should probably track them down > individually; the patch doesn't reference any real instances of that. > But we cannot start failing allocations that have never failed before. > > That said, maybe we want Alan's N_NULL failover in the hangup path too?
I think that would be best. There's always going to be a failure case even if the vmalloc change makes it rarer. Dropping back to N_NULL fixes all of the cases. Alan
