Jinoh Kang (@iamahuman) commented about dlls/ntdll/heap.c:
+/* macros sanity checks */ +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_SIZE_BIN( 0 ) == 0 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_SIZE_BIN( 0x10 ) == 0 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_BIN_SIZE( 0 ) == BIN_SIZE_MIN_0 + 1 * BIN_SIZE_STEP_0 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_SIZE_BIN( 0x11 ) == 1 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_BIN_SIZE( 1 ) == BIN_SIZE_MIN_0 + 2 * BIN_SIZE_STEP_0 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_SIZE_BIN( BIN_SIZE_MAX ) == 0x7f ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_BIN_SIZE( 0x7f ) == BIN_SIZE_MAX ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_SIZE_BIN( BIN_SIZE_MAX + 1 ) == 0x80 ); +C_ASSERT( BLOCK_BIN_SIZE( 0x80 ) == ~0u );
+/* difference between block classes and all possible validation overhead must fit into block tail_size */ +C_ASSERT( BIN_SIZE_STEP_7 + 3 * BLOCK_ALIGN <= FIELD_MAX( struct block, tail_size ) );
+static ULONG affinity_mapping[] = {20,6,31,15,14,29,27,4,18,24,26,13,0,9,2,30,17,7,23,25,10,19,12,3,22,21,5,16,1,28,11,8};
We can use a smaller array for less cache footprint.
```suggestion:-0+0 static UCHAR affinity_mapping[] = {20,6,31,15,14,29,27,4,18,24,26,13,0,9,2,30,17,7,23,25,10,19,12,3,22,21,5,16,1,28,11,8}; ```
(An alternative is a LCG but I'm not sure about its advantages here.)