[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation
From: |
Jeff Barber |
Subject: |
Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Feb 2010 08:15:31 -0500 |
In this particular case, the function definition in the header file:
static void *mem_realloc(void *mem, mem_size_t size)
{
LWIP_UNUSED_ARG(size);
return mem;
}
could simply be replaced with the near-equivalent (which already
appears a few lines further on under a different combination of
ifdefs):
#define mem_realloc(mem, size) (mem)
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Kieran Mansley <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:24 -0500, Bill Auerbach wrote:
>>
>> Worse is that every inclusion of pbuf.h that didn't define mem_realloc
>> will
>> cause this function to be defined. Since it returns an argument,
>> there will
>> be compilers that generate code and create multiple copies of this
>> function.
>> It's small but still wasteful. I believe function definitions are not
>> appropriate in H files because you don't know how they will be
>> handled.
>
> In the case of lwIP where we can't rely on the compiler supporting
> inline I agree. functions defined in .h files should be avoided in
> lwIP.
>
> Kieran
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lwip-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
>
- Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, (continued)
- RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Boulanger, Cyrille, 2010/02/11
- RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Bill Auerbach, 2010/02/10
- Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Sirjee Rooplall, 2010/02/10
- RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Bill Auerbach, 2010/02/10
- Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Jeff Barber, 2010/02/10
- RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Bill Auerbach, 2010/02/10
- RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Kieran Mansley, 2010/02/11
- Re: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation,
Jeff Barber <=
RE: [lwip-users] PBUFS + LWIP 1.3.0 + memory allocation, Stéphane Lesage, 2010/02/10