From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46568)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1agsw6-0004yw-90
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:51:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1agsw1-0004GX-9q
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:51:22 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43170)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1agsw1-0004GQ-4I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 07:51:17 -0400
References: <1458057598-11041-1-git-send-email-dhannawatpooja1@gmail.com>
	<20160317145025.GN14062@stefanha-x1.localdomain>
	<CAPAwAwhLi9LwM-FS3eMHAkc8La2i=_H2zLc+ND2fjmk875Ye3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<56EB34A7.9030601@redhat.com>
	<CAPAwAwiYfsynruAvWuJhiWgdGO8YaG_i6HEfM1w89uezK4Q8WQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <56EBEBAF.2090108@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:51:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAPAwAwiYfsynruAvWuJhiWgdGO8YaG_i6HEfM1w89uezK4Q8WQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4] socket: Allocating Large sized arrays
	to heap
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Pooja Dhannawat <dhannawatpooja1@gmail.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org



On 18/03/2016 12:24, Pooja Dhannawat wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:20 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com
> <mailto:pbonzini@redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>     On 17/03/2016 16:31, Pooja Dhannawat wrote:
>     >
>     >
>     > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com <mailto:stefanha@gmail.com>
>     > <mailto:stefanha@gmail.com <mailto:stefanha@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 09:29:58PM +0530, Pooja Dhannawat wrote:
>     >     > @@ -170,8 +170,8 @@ static void net_socket_send(void *opaque)
>     >     >          s->index = 0;
>     >     >          s->packet_len = 0;
>     >     >          s->nc.link_down = true;
>     >     > -        memset(s->buf, 0, sizeof(s->buf));
>     >
>     >     This change is unrelated to allocating buf1 on the heap.  What is the
>     >     purpose of this line?
>     >
>     >
>     > I moved buf from stack to Heap, used g_new(), but I got your point if we
>     > need to initialize it with 0 then I have to keep that one.
>     >
>     > Other wise doing so it gets whatever garbage it has already.
> 
>     This is s->buf, not buf.  Also, the BiteSizedTasks page says "Make the
>     stack array smaller and allocate on the heap in the rare case that the
>     data does not fit in the small array".
> 
> So here, should I check with stack consumption(size of array) and if it
> is greater than accepted level, then only keep on heap?

If it is greater than the accepted level, the on-stack buffer is not
used and you allocate one that has the right size on the heap.

Paolo

> If no, Can you please help me with this one?
> 
>     Paolo
> 
>