[PATCH-V4] xserver: Optional backtrace handler

Keith Packard keithp at keithp.com
Thu Oct 13 09:53:16 PDT 2011

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:49:42 +0100, Simon Farnsworth <simon.farnsworth at onelan.co.uk> wrote:

> A question - what is it about preforking a backtrace handler that you think
> will put people off using it?

It's an ugly hack to work around a bug in glibc. A non-prefork version
wouldn't consume any resources until the server actually crashes.

If we knew that systems which did not have syscall(2) also had a working
fork(2), then we could simply use syscall(SYS_fork) where available and
expect that to work around any potential glibc bugs.

keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel/attachments/20111013/fdd4ffa7/attachment.pgp>

More information about the xorg-devel mailing list