From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.toke.dk (mail.toke.dk [52.28.52.200]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B01233B2A4 for ; Tue, 26 Dec 2017 11:32:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 17:32:03 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=20161023; t=1514305926; bh=DqfOsU/t46rclW4DDmuv4sDxZSoU8B7yQQFcxW2PerE=; h=Date:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:To:CC:From:From; b=e8h4hAB9/leubuigzoJ672lkL/I9bkgNVgrnhzxXDYxDrO8H5/qrjJtpaoRbPi0i9 Ct+fsrwVQHPtzsMhsnvZ6djVdLrMo2VuSI18kwqvY6qBSuqFCXvNwxCq0BI19ZVQ6l oqky+DFfR4DOVyygXNrW/9EkTU3b3Is+UhT4nqAj/p9tdVaP5sFTU4FqcGBRMYWILj 2PSSmZuFUE6VWaSujw9isHUT1OscKrugsfwk742a9zlz91r9laiym4Ke45kwb5IxkX egTO4PTSqtcHgt1Da/wTEEdwn0qTXlZwec2afz0UcOIRX2WzizyP4yRvqtLZyBxp1+ HHZHGIhGZ5Pkg== In-Reply-To: References: <20171226150816.27668-1-toke@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Dave Taht CC: Cake List From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Toke_H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Message-ID: <667B9140-2F11-4FC8-B786-D3F438BB191E@toke.dk> Subject: Re: [Cake] [PATCH] Split tin stats to its own structure to decrease size of tc_cake_xstats X-BeenThere: cake@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Cake - FQ_codel the next generation List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2017 16:32:10 -0000 On 26 December 2017 17:28:39 CET, Dave Taht wrot= e: >The puzzling thing about the reported error for this function is that >the static analysis checker is complaining about 1400+ bytes being >used *on the stack* (in gnet_stats_copy-app?) for the pa-risc >architecture, and that arch, only, which I just don't "get"=2E Maybe the compiler is being clever and detecting a static allocation which= it then moves to the stack or something? Didn't quite understand that erro= r either=2E=2E=2E >That said, this patch will end up copying less data most of the time, >and fool the static analysis checker in that case=2E Yup, that's what I was going for=2E=2E=2E ;) -Toke