Revisiting "too small to fail"
Revisiting "too small to fail"
[Kernel] Posted May 20, 2017 13:58 UTC (Sat) by corbet
Back in 2014, the revelation that the kernel's memory-management subsystem would not allow relatively small allocation requests to fail created a bit of a stir. The discussion has settled down since then, but the "too small to fail" rule still clearly creates a certain amount of confusion in the kernel community, as is evidenced by a recent discussion inspired by the 4.12 merge window. It would appear that the rule remains in effect, but developers are asked to act as if it did not.