Checking that 2.3.x works reasonnably with low memory configuration is
indeed fine. But developping with so few memory looks like masochism
exacerbation. Are these core developpers also flogged, each time they
provide a bug? ;-)
To sort of answer your question, one of the low memory machines in
question is what stress tests our routing/ipv6 code (it is the router
for an entire university department).
You will note, that there are no missing checks for NULL returns from
kmalloc in the routing code as a byproduct of this :-)
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/