From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AC6A385841D for ; Thu, 1 Sep 2022 19:40:03 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 1AC6A385841D Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1662061202; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=nM3QFzAIXJ7FPcItBGzpfEGTlo3m6swd4KYREzUTgi4=; b=M2qtX3aUV56AnRp32t6z0jYVnOrg0f0x9cffE/1m0+OgMw9Um8ApkK6g5hJsjYaVBMiE0k BE7aVFxqlsQx7cls+zxRT79kI605oKnPsbEVE29vGXe6YGT8N1LHx11RGMgEVseMzUrNpm agr1eUwjliXTFwv2fQOSob0f1X/dwIY= Received: from mail-yb1-f199.google.com (mail-yb1-f199.google.com [209.85.219.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id us-mta-269-QBFtSvIEMo65KUbshyAavQ-1; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 15:40:01 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QBFtSvIEMo65KUbshyAavQ-1 Received: by mail-yb1-f199.google.com with SMTP id k13-20020a056902024d00b0066fa7f50b97so123300ybs.6 for ; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 12:40:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=nM3QFzAIXJ7FPcItBGzpfEGTlo3m6swd4KYREzUTgi4=; b=kzZls+rY44VbuDk/51sXnyRWLrU5jFq+4Y5ieJCbBmhmC0XPnLYVzEv49DzJqMKMDi 6PV8uNJRMFZyCCUH8H7BuvnY2UCYNJx2uz7wII6R29wFqXuQ6SpnXZK4KHqmmVzreEsY pug4vUehHFb0TkS+agOzori/kbecRz/OQ6XVn78AC39vDyKUXTww8upLj0wFDyf9C/4d Cc13sP+mOcaoqYuoaw8GGB73tI7H6+fP45yAZmKr1Yp9MayKYNfpu3QDjlcRjwolq1Wt jF+Xvaa+RJu4GIyZ0Vbm6F4OdtIuDkezXTkeLTx/HwqQLyKw+3CvczLa46rd73PXm7CR vB2A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo0lZTiu9NnKQ+kg4Bxv96uu/iACkQt+Och2e5b6UvmLNKLsZJlg u9hhJKk7puxxeXmpfDKZcYlomnQlHZ68BvIcWCdawCOdwoWKhjKvlUaqqFOEx58uK8SoSZoR+hi /VgXve58kmz78V61NlfxoKvyA6FcLjWw= X-Received: by 2002:a25:7805:0:b0:67c:2b43:a4d3 with SMTP id t5-20020a257805000000b0067c2b43a4d3mr19252073ybc.624.1662061200267; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 12:40:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR73wj4gAbxYOAG2OVZu34x8x4ZiWNcSs4aMT4nF032zd6kH0fIOaFYyEL6V3g9wCDn6ktNZdqKsi6KJk/7wc7w= X-Received: by 2002:a25:7805:0:b0:67c:2b43:a4d3 with SMTP id t5-20020a257805000000b0067c2b43a4d3mr19252065ybc.624.1662061200044; Thu, 01 Sep 2022 12:40:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220830135625.2247198-1-torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> <20220830135625.2247198-2-torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> In-Reply-To: <20220830135625.2247198-2-torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> From: Jeff Johnston Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 15:39:49 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Don't allocate another header when merging chunks To: =?UTF-8?Q?Torbj=C3=B6rn_SVENSSON?= Cc: Newlib X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, GIT_PATCH_0, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 X-BeenThere: newlib@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Newlib mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2022 19:40:05 -0000 Patch applied. Thanks. -- Jeff J. On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 9:57 AM Torbj=C3=B6rn SVENSSON < torbjorn.svensson@foss.st.com> wrote: > In the nano version of malloc, when the last chunk is to be extended, > there is no need to acount for the header again as it's already taken > into account in the overall "alloc_size" at the beginning of the > function. > > Contributed by STMicroelectronics > > Signed-off-by: Torbj=C3=B6rn SVENSSON > --- > newlib/libc/stdlib/nano-mallocr.c | 4 ---- > 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/newlib/libc/stdlib/nano-mallocr.c > b/newlib/libc/stdlib/nano-mallocr.c > index 43eb20e07..b2273ba60 100644 > --- a/newlib/libc/stdlib/nano-mallocr.c > +++ b/newlib/libc/stdlib/nano-mallocr.c > @@ -328,10 +328,6 @@ void * nano_malloc(RARG malloc_size_t s) > /* The last free item has the heap end as neighbour. > * Let's ask for a smaller amount and merge */ > alloc_size -=3D p->size; > - alloc_size =3D ALIGN_SIZE(alloc_size, CHUNK_ALIGN); /* si= ze > of aligned data load */ > - alloc_size +=3D MALLOC_PADDING; /* padding */ > - alloc_size +=3D CHUNK_OFFSET; /* size of chunk head */ > - alloc_size =3D MAX(alloc_size, MALLOC_MINCHUNK); > > if (sbrk_aligned(RCALL alloc_size) !=3D (void *)-1) > { > -- > 2.25.1 > >