This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: ptmalloc2?
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf at alum dot bu dot edu>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 16:50:51 -0400
- Subject: Re: ptmalloc2?
- References: <Pine.CYG.4.58.0405131530280.3944@fordpc.vss.fsi.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 03:40:16PM -0500, Brian Ford wrote:
>We seem to be seeing some significant thread contention issues in
>malloc/free; presumably due to muto contention. As such, I thought I'd
>feel out the possibility of contributing a port of ptmalloc2.
Why does using ptmalloc buy you anything over the current scheme?
You're asking if it's a good idea to use something without stating any
benefits.
cgf
>Since it is used in glibc and is derived from the Cygwin's current Doug
>Lea version, it shouldn't be too drastic a change.
>
>The license for it, when obtained outside of the glibc distribution,
>appears to be compatible with a contribution.
>
>I assume there will be some issues to iron out for integration like:
>
>1.) What needs to be done with the broken debug malloc support.
>2.) Do we use pthread mutexes as it expects or muto's.
>3.) How to deal with it's thread specific data requirement.
>4.) It uses environment variables for tuning by default but this seems to
>introduce a circular dependency.
>5.) etc.
>
>I'm sure there are more issues I haven't found yet, but I just wanted an
>opinion before undergoing too much more effort. Thanks.