From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: bugzilla@dpdk.org
Subject: [Bug 117] in case of malloc_elem_alloc should we
 increment alloc_count (heap->alloc_count++)?
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2018 05:27:29 +0000
Message-ID: <bug-117-3@http.bugs.dpdk.org/>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: dev@dpdk.org
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D117

            Bug ID: 117
           Summary: in case of malloc_elem_alloc should we increment
                    alloc_count (heap->alloc_count++)?
           Product: DPDK
           Version: 18.11
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: CONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: Normal
         Component: core
          Assignee: dev@dpdk.org
          Reporter: vipin.varghese@intel.com
  Target Milestone: ---

file: lib/librte_eal/common/malloc_heap.c
function: heap_alloc

code snippet:

        elem =3D find_suitable_element(heap, size, flags, align, bound, con=
tig);
        if (elem !=3D NULL) {
                elem =3D malloc_elem_alloc(elem, size, align, bound, contig=
);

                /* increase heap's count of allocated elements */
                heap->alloc_count++;
        }

        return elem =3D=3D NULL ? NULL : (void *)(&elem[1]);


is this expected behavior to update counter even if it fails?

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=