Re: gwmem patches

Mon, 06 Apr 2009 04:10:53 -0700 

this patch is a really trivial one.

please try attached patch that should fix this warning.

btw. I don't have such warning ;)

Attachment: gwmem-warning.diff
Description: Binary data




Thanks,
Alex

Am 06.04.2009 um 12:44 schrieb Vincent CHAVANIS:



Did this patch has been tested ?


In file included from ./gwlib/gwlib.h:83,
                from gw/msg.h:69,
                from gw/sms.h:89,
                from gw/sms.c:65:
./gwlib/gwmem.h:188:1: warning: "strdup" redefined
In file included from /usr/include/string.h:423,
                from ./gwlib/gwlib.h:72,
                from gw/msg.h:69,
                from gw/sms.h:89,
                from gw/sms.c:65:
/usr/include/bits/string2.h:1316:1: warning: this is the location of the previous definition 


Vincent.


Alexander Malysh a écrit :

Hi again,
patch commited to cvs.
Thanks,
Alex
Am 06.04.2009 um 10:56 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:

Hi,
Here it goes. gw_calloc + gw_strdup.
BR,
Nikos

   ----- Original Message -----
   *From:* Alexander Malysh <mailto:[email protected]>
   *To:* Andreas Fink <mailto:[email protected]>
   *Cc:* Nikos Balkanas
   <mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]
   <mailto:[email protected]>
   *Sent:* Monday, April 06, 2009 10:26 AM
   *Subject:* Re: gwmem patches

   Hi Nikos,

   we have at least one +1 so please repost your patch.

   Thanks,
   Alex

   Am 03.04.2009 um 17:37 schrieb Andreas Fink:


   I'm +1 on gw_calloc. There's a few times I would have used it in
   the past so its nice to have it in gwlib.

   I see very little optimisation of strdup except we do a strlen
   twice (once explicit in the malloc line an done implicity in the
   strcpy) but it is never bad to save a few microseconds.. (who
   knows one might call this one a gazillion times...). so +1 for
   that one too.


   On 02.04.2009, at 23:21, Alexander Malysh wrote:


   Hi,

   thanks for your patch but:

   1) thread.h patch was wrong. I fixed it in CVS.
2) gw_strdup optimisation looks OK, please submit as extra patch 
   3) gw_calloc, hmm... I don't really see any advantage of this
   one. because
   x = gw_malloc(count*size);
   memset(x, 0);
       do the same. why do we need this?

   Thanks,
   Alex

   Am 02.04.2009 um 19:09 schrieb Nikos Balkanas:


   Hi,
An assortment of small patches to make check_memory_leaks work 
   better:
1) Added support for gw_calloc, which is #undefed but not defined 2) Replaced strcpy with memcpy in gw_strdup for better efficiency 3) Added function prototype in thread.h for mutex_make_measured 
   so that MUTEX_STATS compile correctly.
        Please decide and vote.
        BR,
   Nikos<kannel.diff>






<kannel.diff>


--
Telemaque - 06560 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS - (FR)
Service Technique/Reseau - NOC
Direction du Developpement xMS+
http://www.telemaque.fr/
[email protected]
Tel : +33 4 92 90 99 84 (fax 9142)

Reply via email to