• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc

  • Subject: Re: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
  • From: Paul Davis <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2014 17:31:54 -0500


On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Steven Clark <email@hidden> wrote:

It doesn’t look like this is taking place during the critical time.


indeed, some hardware property change which effectively means that audio processing is likely interrupted.
 

By the way, the last time I checked malloc() was actually bounded (and short) time;


how did you check this?

if the malloc mechanism needs to call brk(2), it will not be bounded. 

free() is the potential problem.  And, implementations these days are pretty smart about free() too.


there are many different implementations of malloc/free, some of which are almost RT safe. i'd be extremely suprised if the one that comes with the Darwin C library meets that description, and it almost certainly doesn't avoid locks. 
 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Coreaudio-api mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
      • From: Steven Clark <email@hidden>
References: 
 >I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc (From: Taylor Holliday <email@hidden>)
 >RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc (From: Steven Clark <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
  • Next by Date: RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
  • Previous by thread: RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
  • Next by thread: RE: I thought audio processing threads weren't supposed to call malloc
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread