| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
|
|
Apparently gcc will omit to copy hidden padding bytes under some circumstances,
which means later on memcmp() will indicate a difference between structs
even though all the visible members are identical.
|
|
|
|
These don't get hit & look like bug magnets to me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently gcc will omit to copy hidden padding bytes under some circumstances,
which means later on memcmp() will indicate a difference between structs
even though all the visible members are identical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The code is now living in it's intended place as a pt middle end.
|
|
|
|
It is really the caller responsibility not to call pipebuffer with null
buffers, etc. But don't let the crash happen here, and still asserting
early.
|
|
In pipebuffer, fencing is done at on a level above sub-allocation, so no
matter how many times slab allocator retries no buffer will be freed. The
pipebuffer fencing implemention already retries allocating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
