Re: [patch-2.4.0-test8-pre1] buglet in sk_init().

On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Alan Cox wrote: > > Wouldn't it be better if we move the null pointer test and the panic() > > inside kmem_cache_create() similar to this > > Most kmem_cache_creates should not be fatal. I question the socket one > in some ways because it is ok to have a protocol family com

Re: [patch-2.4.0-test8-pre1] buglet in sk_init().

> Wouldn't it be better if we move the null pointer test and the panic() > inside kmem_cache_create() similar to this Most kmem_cache_creates should not be fatal. I question the socket one in some ways - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a mess

Re: [patch-2.4.0-test8-pre1] buglet in sk_init().

On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote: > Hi Linus, > > The sock slab cache is critical so one ought to panic if it can't be > created, like we do for all other slab caches. > > Regards, > Tigran > > --- linux/net/core/sock.c Thu Aug 24 08:08:47 2000 > +++ work/net/core/sock.c Wed