This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] malloc: add locking to thread cache


On 01/26/2016 03:44 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
On 26/01/16 00:25, Joern Engel wrote:
With signals we can reenter the thread-cache.  Protect against that with
a lock.  Will almost never happen in practice, it took the company five
years to reproduce a similar race in the existing malloc.  But easy to
trigger with a targeted test.

why do you try to make malloc as-safe?

isn't it better to fix malloc usage in signal handlers?

FYI I once tried to check OSS for violations of signal handler requirements (see https://github.com/yugr/sigcheck). It turned out that many packages (ab)use malloc in sighandlers (directly or via printf et al.). Fixing (or even finding) all badly behaving software out there would be a huge amount of work so "fixing" it on the library side instead may make sense.

-Y


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]