From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server-vie001.gnuweeb.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS,
	URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org;
	s=new2025; t=1757692169;
	bh=Sokj6vuo1GFN8mKRA11PBFyLW1Ay87gSk8H+dNi9bjk=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:
	 Content-Type:In-Reply-To:X-Gw-Outgoing-Server-Hash:X-Gw-Message-ID:
	 X-Gw-PM-Hash:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:
	 In-Reply-To:References:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:
	 User-Agent:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=hzXmXA/uPLX3vgf5zLtGoYiGzisstImy2SYAj155dGh6F51720J0BJJn/2GjtArH2
	 TtjmBU1mqXiUjJGOAobA3aBah1lhkUMeH2xyQcxGY1geuLQPyrw2ATeJkUsrGot30G
	 rAJ4VTYRtYSf0wopPx0Ik1d9B0tYw0ZUYQXmpuu13cTCPUA7OnoIR/wudcicOKKrNs
	 rlj4rB/HV6ckUdutKjoqEwj8CkWsQN7RuW44YRYUkgnnzEfm97n3M6diBacaYh7edq
	 5Jhoju9wMOxf342YDXsMuybHbLDtM5RH/l97odoXv2W80wyNuK2jQdONkzpaCQQv0j
	 yBb44eOLVY5hQ==
Received: from linux.gnuweeb.org (unknown [182.253.126.215])
	by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 987DC31279DB;
	Fri, 12 Sep 2025 15:49:27 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 22:49:21 +0700
From: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>
To: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@gnuweeb.org>
Cc: Ahmad Gani <reyuki@gnuweeb.org>,
	GNU/Weeb Mailing List <gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH gwproxy v10 2/2] gwproxy: refactor code base to add
 experimental raw DNS backend
Message-ID: <20250912154921.GA3885112-ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>
References: <20250910104326.580778-1-reyuki@gnuweeb.org>
 <20250910104326.580778-3-reyuki@gnuweeb.org>
 <CAOG64qOvjYWb-gN7SZQAbxLaMSWuSoDu1Z35+mrqUthb+uGKYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADvAgpJR3orQG-C4f7Q28ZKAWTUNQGwMYa+WiaJU2QRh_cf_w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOG64qOhwW8LJ-cqLpyywakTna8Qzq=8aUp+FWT4zF729AoGLw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAOG64qOhwW8LJ-cqLpyywakTna8Qzq=8aUp+FWT4zF729AoGLw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Gw-Outgoing-Server-Hash: 01afd303c8b96d0c1d5e80aa96a4ee40ec69888f786fa24107c0862c0644af79
X-Gw-Message-ID: f2fa31bba81b459ee5e049fa77cd5855f89431a29bcf77b5ec3a72ea176ee87e
X-Gw-PM-Hash: 02dd3245fa5dea3a86252ee66f211fa4021b7a56629afcdabc1a5534636fa46e
List-Id: <gwml.vger.gnuweeb.org>

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 09:39:36PM +0700, Alviro Iskandar Setiawan wrote:
> It'll complicate the reallocation much, as you have to memmove()
> around the values yourself. In fact, realloc() may return the same
> pointer if it internally doesn't need to expand, or may even use
> mremap() in case the memory was directly allocated via mmap() to
> expand it without the need to call memmove().

Ditto. Not only the memmove() will complicate thing, but also the size
and alignment differences will do too. Note that ->sess_map and
->stack.arr are not the same type.

-- 
Ammar Faizi