On Fri, 2019-05-10 at 11:41 +0530, Maninder Singh wrote: > currently params structure is passed in all functions, which increases > stack usage in all the function and lead to stack overflow on target like > ARM with kernel stack size of 8 KB so better to pass pointer. [] > diff --git a/lib/zstd/compress.c b/lib/zstd/compress.c [] > @@ -206,18 +206,18 @@ ZSTD_compressionParameters ZSTD_adjustCParams(ZSTD_compressionParameters cPar, u > return cPar; > } > > -static U32 ZSTD_equivalentParams(ZSTD_parameters param1, ZSTD_parameters param2) > +static U32 ZSTD_equivalentParams(const ZSTD_parameters *param1, const ZSTD_parameters *param2) > { > - return (param1.cParams.hashLog == param2.cParams.hashLog) & (param1.cParams.chainLog == param2.cParams.chainLog) & > - (param1.cParams.strategy == param2.cParams.strategy) & ((param1.cParams.searchLength == 3) == (param2.cParams.searchLength == 3)); > + return (param1->cParams.hashLog == param2->cParams.hashLog) & (param1->cParams.chainLog == param2->cParams.chainLog) & > + (param1->cParams.strategy == param2->cParams.strategy) & ((param1->cParams.searchLength == 3) == (param2->cParams.searchLength == 3)); > } trivia: Using & instead of && makes this somewhat difficult to read. It's hard to believe this is a performance optimization. It might be better as return param1->cParams.hashLog == param2->cParams.hashLog && param1->cParams.chainLog == param2->cParams.chainLog && param1->cParams.strategy == param2->cParams.strategy && param1->cParams.searchLength == 3 && param1->cParams.searchLength == param2->cParams.searchLength;