From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7C411FADE for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:34:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751445AbdILOeu (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Sep 2017 10:34:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f50.google.com ([74.125.83.50]:33248 "EHLO mail-pg0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751388AbdILOet (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Sep 2017 10:34:49 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id u18so4995872pgo.0 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:34:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:date :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lPVtO93GTOk6WDfNT3wQMJccO4bvBCWZllq+nv/dAVw=; b=cFWWU9isBgtvEq8jlJODQImIn24gXvgS0/ZlleCVej14CX4hqFMbcqgTGlE0xQ9OUS /I+KftnVBB60DWaBAN0HVk1ANWRrrcR7kl1W9+ryNLTjg1tFavH39HgjY00wGcURA4Uh 5TDnDsby92mlYLebHj/QyzBwuZJ2syLwJlDVN6n3srQqzznioIYmPczzZKrqP9gpokrq EFvu8qrC0qWY6qpS3o8XbJu6FcrrTEC34mcsYdf5O/96S/KqHSL2CTUraR55+ZfEWJ9C M9Tbom3oJLxXEels6SUCmvscYWSLInhB1NaqHl3CUtK+XtsyOWeUcssrRGMQJRFlFgZ1 G/yA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to :references:date:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=lPVtO93GTOk6WDfNT3wQMJccO4bvBCWZllq+nv/dAVw=; b=UUnB1VJ30mv0u9ogs2Dm55G124BP2GUZ3VbMjpJPvVISCtzRTwwS8ZGIy9N+ujvjck m2+wNGpR2he4EKHL80MfMf6olaw+l9BH4q8Jhjb3/r5eDHMeBxpifAX47ETuQM04ROog RpCpl6jwmEnZ+G2XvEMLMrxxg8eKLyW8CduoTFQjGvRm/cgvLFsp3pOvjeibZX9E1V7o Sy5V6ry5a1zYoBhtBhux3jCqADSzsLQnb0OFbz8biRaK77YObD8pzC63AXSK/nskn00z XdT5kqaiBm9YMQFOtHBXyxBf2cC/ydjz6Mo+C9fK0rOhqnywXl5Cu5IPbHIgKsskv4Cf tP3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgowptlUIjxJP9NGThFDFCBGudRmQyiNrJbjJIkun5wek21GqqW LzV5K7CjAtmgOw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb76SK04QuqSP1pGkkBsgWirtRfJfWtnI0mAb0iYa4KYD5bgrgKJ3hA2I8MmX80upJPzWXhdLA== X-Received: by 10.84.132.4 with SMTP id 4mr4319235ple.449.1505226888619; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:34:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unique-pc ([218.248.21.162]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z89sm19493915pff.13.2017.09.12.07.34.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:34:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1505226892.27800.37.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] add UNLEAK annotation for reducing leak false positives From: Kaartic Sivaraam To: Stefan Beller , Jeff King Cc: "git@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: References: <20170905130149.agc3zp3s6i6e5aki@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170905130505.him3p4jhxp64r2vy@sigill.intra.peff.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:04:52 +0530 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.5-3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Cyberoam-smtpxy-version: 1.0.6.3 X-Cyberoam-AV-Policy: default X-CTCH-Error: Unable to connect local ctasd Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 15:05 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > > After having a sneak peak at the implementation > it is O(1) in runtime for each added element, and the > space complexity is O(well). > Incidentally I was reading about "complexity of algorithms" and there was the following paragraph in the book, Unfortunately, as Knuth observed, big-O notation is often used by careless writers and speakers as if it had the same meaning as big-Theta notation. Keep this in mind when you see big-O notation used. The recent trend has been to use big-Theta notation whenever both upper and lower bounds on the size of a function are needed. So, if my interpretation is correct the above usage of O(1) and O(well) should have been Θ(1) and Θ(well). -- Kaartic