News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Is OpenSMTPD worthy of OpenBSD inclusion? by vezzy-fnord on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:37PM (#10333815)
Oh, you're criticizing shared-state concurrency, I take it. Event loops seem to have been the norm for C projects for a while.

Both OpenSMTPD and qmail seem to rely on concurrency through forkexec, which would entail deferring to the kernel's CPU scheduling and job control.

Re:Is OpenSMTPD worthy of OpenBSD inclusion? by nickpsecurity on Monday October 05, 2015 @02:45PM (#10333889)
Yeah, specifically unsafe handling of it. Forkexec seems to be a heavyweight (and less portable) approach that even DJB defended in his paper. My gripe should apply to any using threads.

"Event loops seem to have been the norm for C projects for a while."

I'll take you word for it as I've seen that in the few, top-tier ones I scrutinized. There's a similar trail of research dealing with that alternate model. Have a feeling the meme might apply there, too, but won't accuse them until I see for sure. ;)