On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 04:11:24PM -0800, Gurucharan Shetty wrote: >> For systems that do not use linker sections and also do not >> have either HAVE_THREAD_LOCAL or HAVE___THREAD (ex: windows >> using MSVC), a COVERAGE_INC() calls xmalloc which inturn calls >> COVERAGE_INC() creating a recursion that causes a stack overflow. > > Is it still necessary? I just applied some changes that eliminate > differences between systems.
It is still necessary. But instead of changing xmalloc->malloc inside DEFINE_EXTERN_PER_THREAD_DATA, I will have to change the xmalloc in DEFINE_STATIC_PER_THREAD_DATA. Do you think I should change xmalloc->malloc at both the places (to avoid future inconsistencies)? > > If it is still necessary: > Acked-by: Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
