Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:19:23 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposed addition of malloc_size_np() Message-ID: <62921.1143274763@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 25 Mar 2006 19:10:38 %2B1100." <20060325081037.GC703@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20060325081037.GC703@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>, Peter Jeremy writes: >On Sat, 2006-Mar-25 08:46:36 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >>In message <44247DF1.8000002@FreeBSD.org>, Jason Evans writes: >>>=== Proposal === >>>Add malloc_size_np() to libc, and provide the prototype in malloc_np.h: >>> >>> size_t >>> malloc_size_np(const void *ptr); >> >>I'm for the concept, but wonder if it would be smarter to make it >> >> void * >> malloc_np(size_t, size_t *) >> >>so we can do it in one go ? > >That restricts its use to malloc() wrappers. I can also see the >benefit in a function trying to validate the size of an arbitrary >piece of memory that has been passed to it. No you can't, because you cannot be certain that the pointer passed to you is actually an unadultered malloc pointer. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?62921.1143274763>