On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 at 12:35, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Which leaves me with the attached proposed wording.
No objections here. With these comments I'd be using slot MCTX_UNUSED4_ID first, then I'd probably be looking at MCTX_UNUSED5_ID after adjusting wipe_mem to do something other than setting bytes to 0x7F. I'd then use MCTX_UNUSED3_ID since that pattern is only used for larger chunks with glibc (per your findings). After that, I'd probably start looking into making more than 3 bits available. If that wasn't possible, I'd be using MCTX_UNUSED2_ID and at last resort MCTX_UNUSED1_ID. David
