On Sat, 20 Jun 2015, Chris Hecker wrote: > I think was unclear. I don't think there's a way to avoid a wasted > allocation here. I'm happy to have separate keys per thread, but there are > three keyblocks allocated in this scenario: there's the original, get > allocates a copy, set allocates a copy, then I have to free the one from > get because it's not used. There should be a version of set that takes > ownership of the memory, I think. Make sense?
I do now understand what you were saying in a way that I did not before; thanks for the clarification. That said, I don't think that API should exist outside your personal fork, since it's only useful in specific cases and complicates the memory ownership story. -Ben ________________________________________________ Kerberos mailing list Kerberos@mit.edu https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/kerberos
