Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 810671
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T00:55:21+00:00 2026-05-15T00:55:21+00:00

I suspect I am doing something dumb here but I am getting seg faults

  • 0

I suspect I am doing something dumb here but I am getting seg faults on an embedded Linux platform (GCC compiler) when I try to run pthread_rwlock_init() on a rwlock embedded in a structure.

struct rwlock_flag {
    int flag;           // Flag
    pthread_rwlock_t * rwlock;  // Reader/writer lock for flag
};

The following causes a seg fault…

struct rwlock_flag * running;
running = (struct rwlock_flag *) malloc (sizeof(struct rwlock_flag));
rslt = pthread_rwlock_init(running->rwlock, NULL);

As does this…

pthread_rwlock_t * rwlock_dg2;
pthread_rwlock_init(rwlock_dg2,NULL);

However the following works fine…

pthread_rwlock_t rwlock_dg;
pthread_rwlock_init(& rwlock_dg,NULL);

Any thoughts?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-15T00:55:22+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 12:55 am

    Your first and second cases both try to initialise the rwlock for a pointer that points nowhere (well, technically, to a random or NULL location).

    In the first case, you allocate space for your wrapper structure but not the pthread_rwlock_t* within it. Hence it would point to a random location.

    This would work with an actual pthread_rwlock_t rather than a pointer to one:

    struct rwlock_flag {
        int flag;                 // Flag
        pthread_rwlock_t rwlock;  // Reader/writer lock for flag
    };
    struct rwlock_flag * running;
    running = (struct rwlock_flag *) malloc (sizeof(struct rwlock_flag));
    rslt = pthread_rwlock_init(&(running->rwlock), NULL);
    

    In the second, similarly, there’s no backing storage for rwlock_dg2 so it either points to a random location (if allocated within a function) or NULL (if declared at file level). You need:

    pthread_rwlock_t * rwlock_dg2 = malloc (sizeof (pthread_rwlock_t));
    pthread_rwlock_init(rwlock_dg2,NULL);
    

    Your third case, which works, does so because the pointer &rwlock_dg actually points to a real pthread_rwlock_t (which is of course rwlock_dg).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Suspect I am doing something stupid, but I can't see for the wood for
I am doing something that is probably silly, but it would be nice if
I'm trying to do something like this, but Java won't let me. I suspect
I suspect that this has been asked before, but I have no idea what
I suspect this applies to general ASP.Net too but I am not sure. If
I suspect the answer is probably no, but just in case, is there a
I suspect this is impossible, but thought I'd ask. Say I have a class
I need to iterate over a List of objects, doing something only for the
Using python to pick it some pieces so definitely a noob ? here but
Something tells me I'm doing something stupid. I haven't done any programming in a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.