Re: Fix volatile vs. pointer confusion

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fix volatile vs. pointer confusion
Date: 2019-03-14 07:48:09
Message-ID: 8589eca8-bb4c-36fc-3dab-7f87589978e6@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2019-03-11 08:23, 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 */
>
> Attached patch fixes a couple of cases of that. Most instances were
> already correct.

Committed.

I'll wait for the build farm to see if there are any new compiler
warnings because of this, then backpatch.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Naylor 2019-03-14 07:49:40 outdated reference to tuple header OIDs
Previous Message Amit Langote 2019-03-14 07:46:47 Re: why doesn't DestroyPartitionDirectory hash_destroy?