[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: another hash cleanup
From: |
Eric Blake |
Subject: |
Re: another hash cleanup |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:16:28 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) |
Jim Meyering <jim <at> meyering.net> writes:
> > http://repo.or.cz/w/gnulib/ericb.git?a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/hash
> > $ git pull git://repo.or.cz/gnulib/ericb.git hash
>
> By the way, in this change set,
>
> http://repo.or.cz/w/gnulib/ericb.git?a=commitdiff;h=bf740889e7ca68be9e
> fake memory failure, for testing hash_rehash
Well, I _did_ mention that the commit was for testing purposes only, and not to
be committed to savannah ;)
>
> I noticed that this is a no-op:
>
> + if (i == 363)
> + i = i * (i - 362);
Not quite. It exists to provide me a breakpoint that won't get optimized out,
and will still trigger prior to starting the offending hash_rehash, as
determined by the previous run where abort() triggered after hash_rehash had
already run out of memory. But yes, it makes for an awkward-looking gdb
breadcrumb.
--
Eric Blake
- Re: another hash cleanup, (continued)
- Re: another hash cleanup, Eric Blake, 2009/06/18
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/18
- Re: another hash cleanup, Eric Blake, 2009/06/18
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Eric Blake, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Eric Blake, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Eric Blake, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup,
Eric Blake <=
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19
- Re: another hash cleanup, Jim Meyering, 2009/06/19