[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: use of alloca()

To: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
Subject: Re: use of alloca()
From: Volker Lendecke <Volker.Lendecke@SerNet.DE>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 12:45:20 +0100
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 12:45:20 +0100
Cc: OpenLDAP-devel@openldap.org
Content-disposition: inline
In-reply-to: <4CD3E7E5.1080405@symas.com>
Organization: SerNet GmbH, Goettingen, Germany
References: <4CD3E7E5.1080405@symas.com>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 04:17:57AM -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
> A lot of what sl_malloc() is used for was really intended for a
> function that behaves like alloca(). What problems are we signing up
> for by allowing use of alloca()?

In Samba, we have a replacement called talloc_stackframe()
and talloc_tos(). It depends on talloc and thus malloc down
below. For performance we have added a very fast chunk
allocator for the request/response style smb server.

Apart from that, in Samba it's urban legend that alloca is
VERBOTEN... Not sure about the validity of that these days.

Volker

References:
- use of alloca()
  - From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>

Prev by Date: use of alloca()
Next by Date: Re: use of alloca()
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread