From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-return-10485-listarch-gdb=sourceware.cygnus.com@sources.redhat.com>
Received: (qmail 18434 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2002 23:17:51 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-subscribe@sources.redhat.com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb@sources.redhat.com>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-help@sources.redhat.com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com
Received: (qmail 18422 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2002 23:17:49 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 20 Sep 2002 23:17:49 -0000
Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8KN0Li19022
	for <gdb@sources.redhat.com>; Fri, 20 Sep 2002 19:00:21 -0400
Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15])
	by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8KNHlh15887;
	Fri, 20 Sep 2002 19:17:47 -0400
Received: from romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (IDENT:zrPZItMgUWm6sJCgDo4VwVyk1EF+hrNz@romulus.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.251])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g8KNHhC21754;
	Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:17:43 -0700
Received: (from kev@localhost)
	by romulus.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g8KNHfu27649;
	Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:17:41 -0700
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 16:17:00 -0000
From: Kevin Buettner <kevinb@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <1020920231741.ZM27648@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>
        "xmmalloc?" (Sep 20,  3:55pm)
References: <ro14rcktgod.fsf@jackfruit.Stanford.EDU>
To: David Carlton <carlton@math.stanford.edu>, gdb <gdb@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: xmmalloc?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2002-09/txt/msg00328.txt.bz2

On Sep 20,  3:55pm, David Carlton wrote:

> Does GDB currently use xmmalloc in any consistent way?

It may have at one time, but I don't think it does any longer.

> When writing
> functions that might call xmalloc, should I try to write versions that
> call xmmalloc instead and try to find an appropriate md to pass to
> them?  If I don't do that but instead just use xmalloc, will anything
> bad happen?  In particular, am I opening up myself to any new
> possible memory leaks, other than the ones that are, of course, always
> possible when calling xmalloc?

In my opinion, we should just use xmalloc().

> Any background info on this would be appreciated.

See http://sources.redhat.com/gdb/5/onlinedocs/mmalloc.html

Basically, mmalloc was a library which used mmap() for doing
allocations.  If done right, this could be used to implement a saved
state mechanism, but I don't think we've been careful enough in GDB in
recent years for this stuff to still work.  If someone knows if it
ever worked I'd like to hear about the capabilities that it gave
GDB.