Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2016 20:30:46 +0300 (MSK)
From: Alexander Monakov <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] micro-optimize __procfdname

On Sat, 5 Mar 2016, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> There's an option of returning a struct containing both a buffer and a
> pointer, but it's a bit worse code-size-wise and may be too magic:
> struct procfdname_ret {
> 	char *ptr, buf[procfdsize];
> } __procfdname_impl(unsigned fd);
> #define procfdname(fd) __procfdname_impl(fd).ptr
> ... and in __procfdname_impl assign a pointer to last filled position in
> retval.buf to retval.ptr.

Rich explained on IRC that it's not correct (thanks!), and I don't see a way
to unbreak it. Sorry for the noise.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.