On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 9:19 AM Xiaoming Ni <[email protected]> wrote:
> static int get_next_free_loop(char *dev, size_t dev_size, int id)
> {
>          int loopdevno = get_free_loop();
>          if (loopdevno >= 0) {
>                  snprintf(dev, dev_size, LOOP_FORMAT, loopdevno);
>                  return 1; /* use /dev/loop-control */
>          }
>          if (loopdevno == -2) {
>                  snprintf(dev, dev_size, LOOP_FORMAT, id);
>                  return 2;
>          }
>          return -1; /* no free loop devices */
> }
>
> If the dev_size parameter is added to get_next_free_loop(), the code
> size increases, Is it worth?
>
> function                                             old     new   delta
> set_loop                                             734     744     +10
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> (add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 1/0 up/down: 10/0)               Total: 10
> bytes

No, that isn't what I mean. sprintf() is faster than snprintf() when
we are sure the string buffer would never overflow.
Just keep using sprintf() here but add a statement before it:
`assert(dev_size >= LOOP_NAMESIZE);`
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to