Skip to content

Conversation

@bagder
Copy link
Member

@bagder bagder commented Apr 20, 2017

The 'list element' struct now has to be located within the data that is being added to the list. Removes 16.6% (tiny) mallocs from a simple HTTP transfer. (96 => 80)

Also removed return codes since the llist functions can't fail now.

Test 1300 updated accordingly.

The 'list element' struct now has to be a struct within the data that
struct itself that is being held in the list. Removes 16.6% (tiny)
mallocs from a simple HTTP transfer. (96 => 80)

Also removed return codes since the llist functions can't fail now.

Test 1300 updated accordingly.
@mention-bot
Copy link

@bagder, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @amrnablus, @captain-caveman2k and @linusnielsen to be potential reviewers.

@bagder bagder closed this in cbae73e Apr 22, 2017
@amrnablus
Copy link
Contributor

I'm free nowadays, will take a look

@MarcelRaad MarcelRaad deleted the bagder/llist-less-malloc branch April 22, 2017 14:50
@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators May 21, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants