Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:11:53 -0500 From: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Andrew MacIntyre <andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au>, Jason Henson <jason@ec.rr.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: malloc vs ptmalloc2 Message-ID: <20050216041153.GC1069@green.homeunix.org> In-Reply-To: <20050214220807.GF40468@funkthat.com> References: <1108277558l.86500l.0l@BARTON> <20050213082128.GA68307@VARK.MIT.EDU> <42108243.9030800@bullseye.apana.org.au> <20050214130450.GA55300@VARK.MIT.EDU> <20050214220807.GF40468@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 02:08:07PM -0800, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > David Schultz wrote this message on Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 08:04 -0500: > > Right, databases, language runtimes, and the small set of other > > applications for which it really matters usually have their own > > special-purpose allocators. I was counting on that when I said > > that replacing malloc() is unlikely to make a big difference. > > (One could argue, of course, that it's unfortunate that > > applications need to do so.) > > Hmmm, maybe we should bring the zone API into userland? :) It'd be > nice to have some of the features, like the ctor/dtor's... Why not just make UMA the userland implementation, too? It should only cost us one kernel trap instruction per allocation/deallocation operation. With fine-grained kernel locking, why we wouldn't want to trust the same code to both tasks, and possibly optimize more because it can do that? -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050216041153.GC1069>