delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Sun, 7 Jan 2001 08:25:52 +0200 (IST) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com> |
cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: valloc and memalign draft |
In-Reply-To: | <3A55C132.12287.6F26E9@localhost> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010107082143.21289C-100000@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Mark E. wrote: > + /* Temporarily clear chunk-in-use bit so macros work correctly. */ > + b1->size &= ~1; Isn't this a bit dangerous? Doesn't it leave the malloc chain in an inconsistent state, for a small window of opportunities? What if some signal (i.e. exception) strikes between this line and where you restore the bit, and the code run from the signal handler calls memalign?
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |