Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Sunday 11 January 2009 11:15, Carmelo Amoroso wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Author: vda
>>> Date: 2009-01-10 21:02:48 +0000 (Sat, 10 Jan 2009)
>>> New Revision: 24747
>>>
>>> Log:
>>> simple optimizations and style fixes in dynamic loading
>>>
>> Hi Denys,
>> dynamic liner is one of the most sensible piece of code of the uclibc, as 
>> you know,
>> so I don't think that mixing style fixes with optimization is the right way 
>> to go.
> 
> Sorry. See attached files with cleanups and optimizations
> separated.
> 
>> I'd keep things separated, and explicitly highlight when there are not really
>> code changes. I'm sure you have tested all and nothing is broken, but right 
>> now, IMO,
>> it's not the time to change code just for style fix (why is not correct, 
>> anyway ?).
> 
> If you see a mistake, let me know.
> 
>> Could you explain where is the optimization?
> 
> They are all in 2.patch:
> 
> * extern int _dl_secure -> made static.
> * ELF signature checks (4 instances): replaced with single uint32_t 
> comparison.
> * ldso/ldso/dl-hash.c: [[email protected]'s patch] do allocation
>   before if(), since both branches will need it anyway.
> * ldso/ldso/ldso.c: add and use _dl_zalloc(), since malloc+memset
>   is common in that file. Also moved utility functions
>   before "big" ones - didn't want to add forward declaration for _dl_zalloc().
> 
thanks Denys, this is what all of us should do at each commit.
I'll take this an action for my self.

>> why you are in same part removed 
>> the cast to the pointer returned by malloc ?
> 
> In C (as opposed to C++), void* can be implicitly converted to any
> non-const pointer type.
thanks.
> --
> vda
> 
carmelo
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc

Reply via email to