Bruce Evans wrote this message on Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 17:53 +1100:
> On Sat, 14 Feb 2015, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>
> > On 02/14/15 13:33, Ian Lepore wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2015-02-14 at 21:15 +0300, Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 08:46:58PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> >>> B> Using VLAs and also the C99 feature of declarations anwhere, and
> >>> extensions
> >>> B> like __aligned(), we can almost implement a full alloca() using the
> >>> fixed
> >>> B> version of this change:
> >>> B>
> >>> B> /*
> >>> B> * XXX need extended statement-expression so that __buf doesn't go out
> >>> B> * of scope after the right brace.
> >>> B> */
> >>> B> #define my_alloca(n) __extension__ ({
> >>> B> /* XXX need unique name. */ \
> >>> B> char __buf[__roundup2((n), MUMBLE)] __aligned(MUMBLE); \
> >>> B> \
> >>> B> (void *)__buf; \
> >>> B> })
> >>>
> >>> I like this idea. But would this exact code work? The life of
> >>> __buf is limited by the code block, and we exit the block
> >>> immediately. Wouldn't the allocation be overwritten if we
> >>> enter any function or block later?
Could this just be changed to something like:
struct ng_mesg ng_mesg[(SORCVBUF_SIZE + sizeof(struct ng_mesg) - 1) /
sizeof(struct ng_mesg)];
It might allocate a few extra bytes, but no more than 55, and gets
alignment correct w/o lots of other hacks...
--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579
"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
