|
Message-ID: <20170619183451.mwuqlq5oybbbgxgm@voyager> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 20:34:51 +0200 From: Markus Wichmann <nullplan@....net> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Query regarding malloc if statement On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 03:16:16PM +0000, Jamie Mccrae wrote: > Hi, > > I'm using musl to compile a cross-distro application which I've been having problems with and whilst discussing the problem the developer of another project, was shown a musl malloc function which manually checks the contents of each byte and changes it to 0 if the byte is non-0. This code is in src/malloc/malloc.c as so: > > void *__malloc0(size_t n) > { > void *p = malloc(n); > if (p && !IS_MMAPPED(MEM_TO_CHUNK(p))) { > size_t *z; > n = (n + sizeof *z - 1)/sizeof *z; > for (z=p; n; n--, z++) if (*z) *z=0; > } > return p; > } > > > This code causes thousands of errors when using valgrind (in excess of 800,000 for my application) due to checking the value of each byte before it has been set and I have to agree with this other developer that I'm at a loss as to why this is performed. If you step through the array and just set each byte to 0 then there will be no read-before-initialisation error and the function will run much faster due to not having to retrieve the data. Why not instead use: > > for (z=p; n; n--, z++) *z=0; Ah, yet another valgrind false positive. If the memory was allocated with mmap() (which is different from IS_MMAPPED(), because the latter means that ONLY the chunk is in that map), then the first write access will cause a page fault. Avoiding write access therefore improves performance. A lot. Such a mapping will be read as zero without consequence. My advice: Get valgrind to ignore the system library, as it doesn't know what it's doing there. We already had a lot of reclaim_gaps() fun there. Ciao, Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.