romenskiy2012/jemalloc
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc.git synced 2026-07-28 11:23:08 +03:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity

Rename zero_realloc option "strict" to "alloc".

Browse source 
With realloc(ptr, 0) being UB per C23, the option name "strict" makes less sense
now.  Rename to "alloc" which describes the behavior.
This commit is contained in:
Qi Wang 2022-04-15 12:17:59 -07:00 • committed by Qi Wang
parent 5841b6dbe7
commit 0e29ad4efa
7 changed files with 16 additions and 16 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

12
src/jemalloc.c
View file

@ -112,12 +112,12 @@ bool opt_cache_oblivious =
;
zero_realloc_action_t opt_zero_realloc_action =
zero_realloc_action_strict;
zero_realloc_action_alloc;
atomic_zu_t zero_realloc_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
const char *zero_realloc_mode_names[] = {
"strict",
"alloc",
"free",
"abort",
};
@ -1649,9 +1649,9 @@ malloc_conf_init_helper(sc_data_t *sc_data, unsigned bin_shard_sizes[SC_NBINS],
CONF_CONTINUE;
}
if (CONF_MATCH("zero_realloc")) {
if (CONF_MATCH_VALUE("strict")) {
if (CONF_MATCH_VALUE("alloc")) {
opt_zero_realloc_action
= zero_realloc_action_strict;
= zero_realloc_action_alloc;
} else if (CONF_MATCH_VALUE("free")) {
opt_zero_realloc_action
= zero_realloc_action_free;
@ -3578,9 +3578,9 @@ do_realloc_nonnull_zero(void *ptr) {
if (config_stats) {
atomic_fetch_add_zu(&zero_realloc_count, 1, ATOMIC_RELAXED);
}
if (opt_zero_realloc_action == zero_realloc_action_strict) {
if (opt_zero_realloc_action == zero_realloc_action_alloc) {
/*
* The user might have gotten a strict setting while expecting a
* The user might have gotten an alloc setting while expecting a
* free setting. If that's the case, we at least try to
* reduce the harm, and turn off the tcache while allocating, so
* that we'll get a true first fit.