On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:39:44PM +0100, Matthias Drochner wrote: > > m...@eterna.com.au said: > > alloc/free here for whatever is using a lot of memory would be much > > better than increasing the minimum each LWP requires. > > Agreed. In the ppbattach case, it should be sufficient > to put the devinfo printf into a separate function, so > that it doesn't stack up when called recursively. (One > just needs to make sure that the compiler doesn't > inline it again.)
Recursion in the kernel? Isn't that really frowned upon itself? David -- David Laight: da...@l8s.co.uk