From: Diego 'F. <fla...@ge...> - 2006-06-24 02:36:17
|
On Saturday 24 June 2006 03:41, Darren Salt wrote: > And said pointer may very soon become stale due to a free(). Whoops :-) If it's getting free()'d, it was working just out of sheer luck or because = the=20 compiler stopped optimising as it should, by doing double access to memory= =20 every time (probably -fno-strict-aliasing or the previous strict aliasing=20 breakage stopped the optimiser). Sounds like that should be under mutex, but I didn't hit any problem with t= hat=20 patch (have xine with it still running, too)... although I have to say, I=20 don't have DVB, so I couldn't test that part of the code (I tried to do my= =20 best on looking at the code). =2D-=20 Diego "Flameeyes" Petten=F2 - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE |