ASU - out of memory?

Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) raster at
Thu Aug 21 17:59:03 CEST 2008

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:44:36 +0200 Tilman Baumann <tilman at> babbled:

> Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:50:26 +0200 Esben Stien <b0ef at>
> > babbled:
> > 
> >> Tilman Baumann <tilman at> writes:
> >>
> >>> all the linux memory overcommit behaviour more or less depends on
> >>> the fact that it can allways save it's ass by using swap. (Instead
> >>> of helplessley crashing)
> >> Yes, or killing the application. Not having swap is nonsense;). If you
> >> are using swap something is wrong, right, but then you fix it. I find
> >> it strange that the debian install didn't make a little swap
> >> partition.
> > 
> > and luckily those smart fellas in kernel developer land.. made kernel
> > overcommit.. a tunable parameter! and... cunningly.. on the FR (and as wel
> > on my desktop) it's turned off! :) so... a moot point really. :)
> pardon? Honestly? This is absurd!
> Why? I don't get it.
> I mean, how did you get the impression that overcomitting is a bad thing?

when it makes:

myptr = malloc(somesize);
if (myptr == NULL) return -1; // return and unwind
// continue as normal

useless so i mayaswell do:
myptr = malloc(somesize);
if (myptr == NULL) abort();

ala glib. all that error checking code programs have becomes stupid. i should
just assume all mallocs succeed!. as they likely will and part way through
accessing the memory malloc actually returned - i may segv because i dont have
enough ram. that's just bad! what's the point of error codes and returns then?
whats the point of even trying to handle an error? :( may as well throw in the
towel ala glib.

Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) <raster at>

More information about the community mailing list