Re: [PATCH][BZ #16009] fix memory handling in strxfrm_l

[Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 10:36:11AM +0100, Leonhard Holz wrote:
> I want to object here. The needed cache size can be in a region where the
> malloc will not fail but hurt the system performance considerable
> (swapping), especially as the malloced size is five times the string size. I
> think that low level functions like strxfrm should not carry such risks.

Fair enough.  In that case just mention in a comment that the size
you've chosen is arbitrary and only ensures that it is small enough to
be contained on the stack.  If someone wants to prove that the size is
optimal (or another size is optimal) then they can do that on top of
your change.

Siddhesh

Attachment: pgpp7nUC90EOD.pgp
Description: PGP signature