Hi Thomas (kugel), Am Sonntag, 15. Februar 2015, 23:45:48 schrieb Thomas Martitz: > The below commit isn't necessary. > > buflib buffers can be passed to yielding functions just fine. Problems > only arise if the are concurrent allocations, for example if two threads > allocate from the same context simultaneously or if the callee does it's > own allocations. This can't happen in the pictureflow case, it has it's > own context and a single thread allocating from it. > > Therefore the problem isn't yield() itself, but possible concurrent > buflib_alloc() calls that result from the thread switch. This is because > compaction only ever happens on allocation (and not in a backgroud > thread or so). > > Best regards. > > > commit 9076b433d18b5db1a1987fe99ca7c70808f22b0e > Author: Thomas Jarosch <t...@simonv.com> > Date: Thu Jan 1 23:45:24 2015 +0100 > > PictureFlow: Add move callback for buflib allocations > > If we don't provide a callback to buflib_alloc(), > the buffer is always movable (to reduce fragmentation). > > Since we pass our buffer to functions that call yield(), > this could lead to memory corruption on buflib compaction. > > Change-Id: Id1fad1822479d692551c55cb8bc87cea7b78f759
thanks for the review. I noticed the same thing a few days after committing it. It occupied my mind why it wasn't crashing before ;) Do you think we should revert it or keep it? It won't hurt I guess. Did you have a chance to look at the other buflib changes I did? They should be correct IMHO. Cheers, Thomas
