On Tue, 4 Apr 2017, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 04-04-17 14:13:06, Cristopher Lameter wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Apr 2017, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > Yes, but we do not have to blow the kernel, right? Why cannot we simply > > > leak that memory? > > > > Because it is a serious bug to attempt to free a non slab object using > > slab operations. This is often the result of memory corruption, coding > > errs etc. The system needs to stop right there. > > Why when an alternative is a memory leak?
Because the slab allocators fail also in case you free an object multiple times etc etc. Continuation is supported by enabling a special resiliency feature via the kernel command line. The alternative is selectable but not the default.