From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-95410-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 101486 invoked by alias); 21 Aug 2018 00:07:05 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 101470 invoked by uid 89); 21 Aug 2018 00:07:03 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=profiles
X-HELO: mail-qk0-f193.google.com
Return-Path: <carlos@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] malloc: Ensure lower bound on chunk size in
 __libc_realloc.
To: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: pistukem@gmail.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
References: <xnh8jog2gu.fsf@greed.delorie.com>
From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
Openpgp: preference=signencrypt
Message-ID: <77a44dac-2e33-9c22-5d33-f6f0f57e8a42@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2018 00:07:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <xnh8jog2gu.fsf@greed.delorie.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00441.txt.bz2

On 08/20/2018 05:20 PM, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> writes:
>> DJ, can you benchmark this change?  If it turns out this is visible in 
>> profiles, we may have to move this check closer to the actual memcpy.
> 
> I couldn't detect any measurable change from this patch.
 
How did you benchmark it? perf?

What were the results?

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.