Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:36:06 -0800
From:      Jason Evans <jasone@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@freebsd.org>
Cc:        jasone@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Subject:   Re: threaded, forked, rethreaded processes will deadlock
Message-ID:  <49710BD6.7040705@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090116211959.GA12007@green.homeunix.org>
References:  <20090109031942.GA2825@green.homeunix.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0901082237001.28531@sea.ntplx.net> <20090109053117.GB2825@green.homeunix.org> <4966F81C.3070406@elischer.org> <20090109163426.GC2825@green.homeunix.org> <49678BBC.8050306@elischer.org> <20090116211959.GA12007@green.homeunix.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brian Fundakowski Feldman wrote:
  > Could you, and anyone else who would care to, check this out?  It's 
a regression
> fix but it also makes the code a little bit clearer.  Thanks!
> 
> Index: lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c

Why does malloc need to change for this?  Unless there's a really good 
reason, I don't want the extra branches in the locking functions.

Thanks,
Jason



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49710BD6.7040705>