Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > From: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > How come we got along with this not very portable construct for so long?
>> > Probably because the array sizes were computed from the results of
>> > strlen() of string constants. Anyway, a follow-up patch will make the
>> > lengths really non-constant.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> > sideband.c | 14 ++++++++++++--
>> > 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/sideband.c b/sideband.c
>> > index 756bbc2..513d7b3 100644
>> > --- a/sideband.c
>> > +++ b/sideband.c
>> > @@ -19,7 +19,10 @@ int recv_sideband(const char *me, int in_stream, int out, int err)
>> > {
>> > unsigned pf = strlen(PREFIX);
>> > unsigned sf = strlen(SUFFIX);
>> > - char buf[pf + LARGE_PACKET_MAX + sf + 1];
>> > + char *buf, *save;
>> > +
>> > + save = xmalloc(sf);
>> > + buf = xmalloc(pf + LARGE_PACKET_MAX + sf + 1);
>>
>> I have to wonder if the malloc() overhead is small enough
>> compared to the network bandwidth to make a two malloc-free
>> pairs per packet a non-issue...
>
> Eeek. Overhead might be insignificant, but it still doesn't feel right.
>
> What about using alloca() instead? This is not like if we are doing
> funky things with the allocated memory anyway.
That's double Eek as I recall AIX is not dead.
How about using a constant large enough slop? It is not like
PREFIX and SUFFIX are different vastly between calls.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
