bfd: use less memory in string merging
Michael Matz
matz@suse.de
Thu Nov 9 16:45:34 GMT 2023
Hey,
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> I think it would be nice to be independent of such an implementation
> >> detail of the underlying library.
> >
> > Yes. But do you mean it as pre-requisite for the patch? In that case
> > I'll try something about a bucket allocator for the offsetmap blocks,
> > though I think it's a bit on the extreme to work around lousy mallocs in
> > current times.
>
> I definitely wouldn't go as far as asking for such a rework. What I'd
> like to see though is that the realloc() return values be latched into
> a local, and instead of failing upon the function returning NULL the
> old pointers in the struct simply not be updated. Preferably with that
> adjustment okay to put in.
Oh, that makes sense, yes. (The contract on the bfd_realloc wrapper is a
bit unhelpful here, it invariably will set bfd_error_no_memory when
returning NULL, but I still agree with you that it's nicer to not
overwrite the existing pointer when realloc didn't work).
Ciao,
Michael.
>
> Jan
>
> >> (It may also be worthwhile then to shrink the larger of the
> >> two arrays first. Otoh the comment ahead of mapofs_type already
> >> indicates that this type may need widening at some point.)
> >
> > That is true nevertheless, so consider this changed in the patch.
> >
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Michael.
>
More information about the Binutils
mailing list