From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16901: 24.3.50; emacs_backtrace.txt Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 05:45:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83iorusk3h.fsf@gnu.org> References: <831tylvkq2.fsf@gnu.org> <83lhwstu1k.fsf@gnu.org> <83ppm3rznz.fsf@gnu.org> <53150E29.7080504@cornell.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393904771 23594 80.91.229.3 (4 Mar 2014 03:46:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 03:46:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16901@debbugs.gnu.org, lekktu@gmail.com, dmantipov@yandex.ru To: Ken Brown Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 04 04:46:19 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgJ8-0001RJ-Ey for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 04:46:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42810 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgJ6-0007B7-O2 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:46:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40029) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgIx-000770-HJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:46:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgIs-0005LD-Jv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:46:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:48514) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgIs-0005L9-Gw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:46:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgIr-00088u-RG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:46:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 03:46:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16901 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 16901-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16901.139390472931246 (code B ref 16901); Tue, 04 Mar 2014 03:46:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16901) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Mar 2014 03:45:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49696 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgIK-00087t-PJ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:45:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:51848) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WKgID-00087f-GL for 16901@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:45:23 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N1W009007DU2300@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for 16901@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 05:45:19 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N1W0085P7RJQU80@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 05:45:19 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <53150E29.7080504@cornell.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:86515 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 18:20:09 -0500 > From: Ken Brown > CC: 16901@debbugs.gnu.org, dmantipov@yandex.ru > > If adj == 0 in line 1596, then we've allocated much more memory than > we needed, and the next call to malloc (line 1602) allocates even > more. And if adj == 1 in line 1596, then we've allocated exactly as > much memory as we needed, so there's no need to call malloc again in > line 1602. Thanks for reviewing. These are further optimizations, and can (and probably should) be done in separate commits. But you aren't saying that the previous code was correct, are you?