Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:58:50 +0200 From: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: Marc Olzheim <marcolz@stack.nl>, freebsd-threads@freebsd.org, Marc Olzheim <marcolz@ilse.net>, David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>, Sven Berkvens-Matthijsse <sven@ilse.net> Subject: Re: threads/76690: fork hang in child for (-lc_r & -lthr) Message-ID: <20051024165850.GA28694@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.43.0510241239180.17636-100000@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20051024144529.GP22568@ilse.net> <Pine.GSO.4.43.0510241239180.17636-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 12:41:01PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > But then the free() in the child process may be using an unstable > > state of the malloc system (because if you don't acquire the lock > > before the fork(), malloc() may be busy in the middle of the fork()). > > I don't think that can happen because libc_r will not switch out > a thread that is in a critical region (and libc locks are critical > regions) until it leaves the region. Well, that would be the idea, but GDB traces prove otherwise... :P And that's why the patch prevents the test program in the PR from hanging. Marc [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFDXRLKezjnobFOgrERAukqAJ4shbzfmw0/lTJVx5gFji4OuRY0eQCgwBl4 pjkKgtYjRuELVkcc4X6e/fU= =C/QT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051024165850.GA28694>