Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator

From: Willy Tarreau (willy@novworld.Novecom.Fr)
Date: Fri Jul 07 2000 - 10:37:53 EST

Next message: anamaru@hat.hi-ho.ne.jp: "$BCK@-8BDj$N>pJs$G$9!#("
Previous message: Davide Libenzi: "Re: new latency report"
In reply to: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Next in thread: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Reply: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> Not threadsafe.

Hmmm, I forgot that aspect :-/
Although we could guarantee a certain amount of threads with locks properly set,
that's not acceptable and I don't have any quick solution to this problem, the
way I use it.

Willy

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: anamaru@hat.hi-ho.ne.jp: "$BCK@-8BDj$N>pJs$G$9!#("
Previous message: Davide Libenzi: "Re: new latency report"
In reply to: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Next in thread: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Reply: Oliver Xymoron: "Re: [RFC] solution for the inet_ntoa problem, buffer allocator"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 21:00:21 EST