From owner-freebsd-current Sun Aug 12 6: 7:38 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4883037B406; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 06:07:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: (from eischen@localhost) by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) id JAA18732; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 09:06:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 09:06:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen To: Michael Robinson Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: _sigprocmask in malloc.c causes full file table? In-Reply-To: <20010812152655.A1569@elephant.netrinsics.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 12 Aug 2001, Michael Robinson wrote: > Julian Elischer wrote: > >Malloc is not re-entrant...i.e. > >you cannot use in in a signal handler.. > > Thank you for that very helpful bit of information, but I already knew that. > > What I do not know is how it is possible for a null _sigprocmask call > (a SIG_BLOCK call with no mask bits set) in libc/stdlib/malloc.c to cause a Sorry, I missed this the first time... Where is there a _sigprocmask() call in libc/stdlib/malloc.c? I don't find one. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message