Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2009 18:06:08 +0100 From: Ulrich =?utf-8?B?U3DDtnJsZWlu?= <uqs@spoerlein.net> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@sippysoft.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Jason Evans <jasone@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: heap limits: mmap(2) vs. break(2) on i386 Message-ID: <20091129170608.GN3406@acme.spoerlein.net> In-Reply-To: <4B10896E.3080201@sippysoft.com> References: <4B1041EB.9020109@sippysoft.com> <4B1059CA.6040605@FreeBSD.org> <4B10687D.3050209@sippysoft.com> <4B107D29.5030307@FreeBSD.org> <4B10896E.3080201@sippysoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 27.11.2009 at 18:22:38 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Crazy idea, perhaps, but has anyone considered wrapping up sbrk(2) into > mmap(2), so that there is only one memory pool to draw from? Switch to > 64-bit certainly helps, however there are lot of 32-bit machines hanging > around and we will see them for a while in the embedded space. Certainly > current situation with two separate sources of heap memory is not normal. Alternative and very low tech test: - Remove sbrk() from libc and /usr/include - Run port test build - ??? - PROFIT! It shall be interesting to see which ports blow up thanks to sbrk() missing. Regards, Uli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091129170608.GN3406>