Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:20:35 +0100
From:      Radim Kolar <hsn@netmag.cz>
To:        Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: kern/61691: very bad performance of realloc()/brk()
Message-ID:  <20040123152035.GA2311@asura.bsd>
In-Reply-To: <200401221457.i0MEvpXF075936@freefall.freebsd.org>
References:  <200401221457.i0MEvpXF075936@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> You seem to be confused as to what responsibilities the programmer
> has when it comes to practicing sensible memory management.
I have run some benchmarks for you. There are doing 32 times realloc() in
1 MB chunks. I don't think that this is example of bad programming
practice. The major problem is that realloc() copies data while Linux
doesn't.

FreeBSD 5.2
===========
It looks that brk() syscall is quite slow in FreeBSD when comparing
against Linux. FreeBSD calls 32 times brk() and 10 times mmap+munmap (for page directory).

(hsn@ttyv0):~/forkbomb% time ./forkbomb -l 32 -i 256 -M --quit            12:45
Safety alarm at 300 sec. enabled.
Actions: alloc 32 MB (step 1024 kB) and touch it.
Forkbomb 1.2 started.
./forkbomb -l 32 -i 256 -M --quit  4.58s user 5.28s system 74% cpu 13.159 total

linux2.4+glibc2.3.2
===================
Linux does 1 times mmap + 31 times mremap syscall

Safety alarm at 300 sec. enabled.
Actions: alloc 32 MB (step 1024 kB) and touch it.
Forkbomb 1.2 started.
./forkbomb -l 32 -i 256 -M --quit  0.00s user 0.30s system 107% cpu 0.280 total

Well my pr-report/wish is: optimize realloc() function (which is about 3 pages
long) to avoid copying data while brk() is sufficient , because the reallocated block is
last block. 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040123152035.GA2311>