Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Fri, 24 May 2002 20:47:56 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: bug in dll_crt0_1()?
Message-ID:	<20020525004756.GB19249@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C6151 AT itdomain003 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<FC169E059D1A0442A04C40F86D9BA7600C6151@itdomain003.itdomain.net.au>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 11:51:36AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>Interesting situation:
>
>I have a function that is called from dll_crt0_1 via
>  do_global_ctors (&__CTOR_LIST__, 1);
>that uses malloc(). Malloc is not ready until malloc_init, called from
>heap_init() called from memory_init(), called from ... dll_crt0_1.
>
>Should the memory_init() occur earlier, or should the global constructor
>call memory_init() directly? or should malloc() check that memory_init()
>has been called?

Adding malloc calls to cygwin's startup code is something that should
be given a lot of thought.  Ditto, adding ctors.  If you're profiling
cygwin, I think you'll find that a surprising amount of time is
taken up in ctors.

cgf

- Raw text -