On 24 February 2017 at 05:20, Ted Hess <th...@kitschensync.net> wrote:
> The current implementation of calloc_a() returns packed pointers for the extra
> arguments. These packed, unaligned, pointers are OK for a lot of
> architectures,
> but not all. This patch will aligned the pointers returned in a manner
> congruent
> with malloc(). I do not believe the extra padding overhead is all the
> burdensome
> considering the overhead of separate malloc/calloc/free call to accomplish the
> same thing.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Ted Hess <th...@kitschensync.net>
> ---
> utils.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/utils.c b/utils.c
> index 5d9d5aa..314f716 100644
> --- a/utils.c
> +++ b/utils.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@
> _addr; \
> _addr = va_arg(_arg, void **), _len = _addr ? va_arg(_arg,
> size_t) : 0)
>
> +#define C_PTR_ALIGN (2*sizeof(size_t))
> +#define C_PTR_MASK (-C_PTR_ALIGN)
> +
sizeof(long) should be used for C_PTR_ALIGN, though I cannot find the
quote at the moment...
yousong
> void *__calloc_a(size_t len, ...)
> {
> va_list ap, ap1;
> @@ -40,7 +43,7 @@ void *__calloc_a(size_t len, ...)
>
> va_copy(ap1, ap);
> foreach_arg(ap1, cur_addr, cur_len, &ret, len)
> - alloc_len += cur_len;
> + alloc_len += (cur_len + C_PTR_ALIGN - 1 ) & C_PTR_MASK;
> va_end(ap1);
>
> ptr = calloc(1, alloc_len);
> @@ -49,7 +52,7 @@ void *__calloc_a(size_t len, ...)
> alloc_len = 0;
> foreach_arg(ap, cur_addr, cur_len, &ret, len) {
> *cur_addr = &ptr[alloc_len];
> - alloc_len += cur_len;
> + alloc_len += (cur_len + C_PTR_ALIGN - 1) & C_PTR_MASK;
> }
> va_end(ap);
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lede-dev mailing list
> Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
