Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote on 2010/10/21 13:51:26:
>
> Dear Joakim Tjernlund,
>
> In message <OFD5ABFC5E.96E88C93-ONC12577C3.00406E0E-C12577C3.
> 00408...@transmode.se> you wrote:
> >
> > > It is legal for malloc() to return NULL in case of size==0,
> > > and for the sake of simplicity I recommend we do just that.
> >
> > Yes, but not very useful. Glibc does not return NULL
>
> Maybe not in the current implementation, and not on the architecture
> you checked. Current doc reads: "If size is 0, then malloc() returns
> either NULL, or a unique pointer value that can later be successfully
> passed to free()."
On linux and the tests I made, the unique pointer value is what I get.
Possibly it is configurable.
>
> Of course we could return some valid pointer like glibc does, i. e.
> implement something like
>
> if (size == 0)
> size = 8;
>
> or so. Do you think that would be better?
Better than NULL, but best would be a ptr that will SEGV if
you try to defer it. Not the easiest to impl., perhaps
~0 will do?
Jocke
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
