Re: Fix volatile vs. pointer confusion

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fix volatile vs. pointer confusion
Date: 2019-03-11 11:57:39
Message-ID: 20190311115739.GA5231@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-Mar-11, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> Variables used after a longjmp() need to be declared volatile. In
> case of a pointer, it's the pointer itself that needs to be declared
> volatile, not the pointed-to value. So we need
>
> PyObject *volatile items;
>
> instead of
>
> volatile PyObject *items; /* wrong */

Looking at recently committed 2e616dee9e60, we have introduced this:

+ volatile xmlBufferPtr buf = NULL;
+ volatile xmlNodePtr cur_copy = NULL;

where the pointer-ness nature of the object is inside the typedef. I
*suppose* that this is correct as written. There are a few occurrences
of this pattern in eg. contrib/xml2.

--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2019-03-11 11:57:49 Re: Fix optimization of foreign-key on update actions
Previous Message Shaoqi Bai 2019-03-11 11:49:11 Re: Fwd: Add tablespace tap test to pg_rewind