From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 13 19:54:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F81F16A41F; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:54:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from kane.otenet.gr (kane.otenet.gr [195.170.0.95]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1FBF43D5C; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:54:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from flame.pc (aris.bedc.ondsl.gr [62.103.39.226]) by kane.otenet.gr (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-8) with SMTP id k0DJstGA032618; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:54:56 +0200 Received: by flame.pc (Postfix, from userid 1001) id B97EC11773; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:53:19 +0200 (EET) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 21:53:19 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Poul-Henning Kamp Message-ID: <20060113195319.GA17963@flame.pc> References: <1A89617A-5F0E-492E-8C21-10A4F679BCD2@freebsd.org> <14547.1137178334@critter.freebsd.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <14547.1137178334@critter.freebsd.dk> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Jason Evans Subject: Re: HEADSUP: malloc changeover X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:54:59 -0000 On 2006-01-13 19:52, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >In message <1A89617A-5F0E-492E-8C21-10A4F679BCD2@freebsd.org>, Jason Evans writes: >> The most likely types of application bugs that this malloc >> implementation will uncover are: > > And speaking from experience: You can do Jason a big favour by > trying your app with Electric Fence or similar before yelling > at him. HEH! Definitely. I have built & run at least four versions since January 11, two with DEBUG_FLAGS='-g' for both userland and kernel and two without. As Jason said, we should probably keep looking for potential problems both in the new malloc() and the programs that use it, but the fact that my laptop still runs quite fine with several dozens of ports installed some time back in December seems to imply there aren't any _really_ _nasty_ bugs in malloc so far Jason, thanks for the work you've put into this :)