On Tue, 8 Oct 2024 10:29:23 +0200 Morten Brørup <m...@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:step...@networkplumber.org] > > Sent: Sunday, 29 September 2024 17.35 > > > > The allocation functions take a alignment argument that > > can be useful to hint the compiler optimizer. > > > > This is supported by Gcc and Clang but only useful with > > Gcc because Clang gives warning if alignment is 0. > > This patch defines and uses __rte_alloc_align(). OK. > > > > > Recent versions of GCC have a malloc attribute that can > > be used to find mismatches between allocation and free; > > the typical problem caught is a pointer allocated with > > rte_malloc() that is then incorrectly freed using free(). > > This patch defines __rte_alloc_func(), but uses it in the next patch in the > series. > Suggest either doing both here, or move the definition of __rte_alloc_func() > to the next patch. > > > > +/** > > + * Tells the compiler this is a function like malloc and that the > > pointer > > + * returned cannot alias any other pointer (ie new memory). > > There's a good example of its use here: > https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2021/04/30/detecting-memory-management-bugs-with-gcc-11-part-1-understanding-dynamic-allocation#detecting_mismatched_deallocations > > It not only refers to memory, but also handle pointers. > You might want to replace "ie new memory" by "ie new object" or similar. > > > Please add the optional arguments to pass to __rte_alloc_func to the macro > description, e.g.: > @param [free_func] > The name of the deallocation function to free the allocated object > @param [free_func_ptr_index] > The deallocation function's argument index of the object pointer. > > PS: The brackets indicate that the parameter is optional. I didn't know, so > it is what I found on the internet. In later versions of the patch decided that naming and parameters should follow the precedent used in glibc. See new version sent today.
