This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH v1.1] Expand MALLOC_COPY and MALLOC_ZERO to memcpy/memset.

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 08:05:13AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 08:02:10PM +0100, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 07:39:40PM +0100, OndÅej BÃlka wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > Continuing cleaning malloc we also expand MALLOC_COPY and MALLOC_ZERO
> > > to their bodies.
> > > 
> > After running check expansion in hook.c is also needed.
> > 
> > 	* malloc/malloc.c (MALLOC_COPY, MALLOC_ZERO): Delete.
> > 	(__malloc_assert, __libc_realloc, __libc_calloc,
> > 	_int_realloc): Expand MALLOC_COPY and MALLOC_ZERO to memcpy and
> > 	memset.
> > 	* malloc/hooks.c: Likewise.
> 	* malloc/hooks.c (realloc_check): Likewise.
> Otherwise the change looks OK.

On second thoughts, I vaguely remember an old thread that talked about
maintaining compatibility with the old code being the reason why we
keep everything about the malloc code the way it is, including the
formatting.  I believe that we may have diverged from the original
code enough that we don't have any incentive to keep this
compatibility, but I'm going to defer to the senior folks (Roland,
Andreas', Carlos, Joseph, etc.) to take the final call on this.

Same goes for the INTERNAL_SIZE_T patch you had posted - something
about that patch reminded me of the discussion.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]