This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
>>>>> Ulrich Drepper writes: Uli> Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes: >> Nevertheless we shouldn't call free (0). Uli> I don't agree. The if just increases the binary size. We should Uli> never increase the binary size if this is not performance critical. Uli> E.g., I would agree to having this `if' if this would be in code which Uli> runs normally. But this is debugging code and we don't care about Uli> speed (besides, it's executed exactly once). I looked at shadow/fgetspent.c and there was also an if. The message in mtrace confused me. Shall I revert the patch and change fgetspent.c also? Should we teach mtrace to not emit an error message for free(0) ? Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger SuSE Labs aj@suse.de private aj@arthur.inka.de
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |