Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:08:35 -0800
From:      Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org>
To:        "Pedro F. Giffuni" <pfg@freebsd.org>
Cc:        src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,  svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r328218 - in head/sys: amd64/amd64 arm/xscale/ixp425 arm64/arm64 cam cam/ctl compat/ndis dev/aacraid dev/advansys dev/ath dev/beri/virtio dev/bnxt dev/bwn dev/ciss dev/cxgbe/crypto dev/...
Message-ID:  <CAG6CVpXxuFyHS11rF=NF6bSSkC2=xnDh=WnbK-aWp4sOomrZ7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201801211542.w0LFgbsp005980@repo.freebsd.org>
References:  <201801211542.w0LFgbsp005980@repo.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Pedro,

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 7:42 AM, Pedro F. Giffuni <pfg@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Author: pfg
> Date: Sun Jan 21 15:42:36 2018
> New Revision: 328218
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/328218
>
> Log:
>   Revert r327828, r327949, r327953, r328016-r328026, r328041:
>   Uses of mallocarray(9).
>
>   The use of mallocarray(9) has rocketed the required swap to build FreeBSD.
>   This is likely caused by the allocation size attributes which put extra pressure
>   on the compiler.

I'm confused about this change.  Wouldn't it be better to remove the
annotation/attributes from mallocarray() than to remove the protection
against overflow?  (If the compiler is fixed in the future to not use
excessive memory with these attributes, they can be conditionalized on
compiler version, of course.)

Best,
Conrad



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAG6CVpXxuFyHS11rF=NF6bSSkC2=xnDh=WnbK-aWp4sOomrZ7w>