From owner-freebsd-hackers  Sun Sep 22 18:33:10 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA05919
          for hackers-outgoing; Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alpo.whistle.com (s205m1.whistle.com [207.76.205.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA05893
          for <hackers@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from current1.whistle.com (current1.whistle.com [207.76.205.22]) by alpo.whistle.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id SAA18781; Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:29:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3245E79E.6EEA4806@whistle.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 18:27:58 -0700
From: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>
Organization: Whistle Communications
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6 (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.2-CURRENT i386)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp>
CC: Jeffrey Hsu <hsu@freefall.freebsd.org>, jb@cimlogic.com.au,
        hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: libc_r bug
References: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960923100330.11191C-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Michael Hancock wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, Jeffrey Hsu wrote:
> 
> >   > _thread_fd_table_init() just sets up
> >   > the table for a fd. fds 0, 1 and 2 don't have to be valid.
> >
> > Since we can't tell whether a given fd might need a call to
> > _thread_fd_table_init() or not, the correctness before all else
> > principle would argue for either pre-allocating all the fd entries
> > or doing it on demand by placing a call to _thread_fd_table_init()
> > in write() and all the other places where it might be needed.  Of
> > these two, I prefer the second.  What about you?
> >
> 
> I prefer on demand too.
but what's the overhead on every file operation?

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mike Hancock