On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 02:57:59PM +0200, Kars Mulder wrote: > On Monday, July 06, 2020 12:34 CEST, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > That's a lot of stack space, is it really needed? Can we just use a > > static variable instead, or dynamically allocate this? > > It is very possible to statically or dynamically allocate this. > > Statically reserving an additional 128 bytes regardless of whether > this feature is actually used feels a bit wasteful, so I'd prefer > stack or dynamic allocation. > > An earlier draft of my patch did dynamically allocate this memory; > early discussion (https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/7/3/248) suggested that > dynamic allocation has the disadvantage of introducing a new obscure > error condition: > > On Friday, July 03, 2020 10:13 CEST, David Laight wrote: > > The problem with strdup() is you get the extra (unlikely) failure path. > > 128 bytes of stack won't be a problem if the function is (essentially) > > a leaf. Just test for memory allocation failure and handle it properly, it isn't hard to do. 128 bytes on the stack can be a problem, don't get in the habit of doing so please. thanks, greg k-h
