From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30353383A0D4 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:56:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 30353383A0D4 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1670846175; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=u2p8ZfzhdyiH2XcjYLv66NDMnCRUZTMEgO7JVOG3Vfc=; b=WRMA7uX8sIq20oyWZvPQOpQ5LEpR9R7aKhz/LxejmvkGOOo4SoZWXKvH43TkqAumZxhOqF GQKssEe7luCx9CMBFG3Fr/H4MP718pj/ErJvOimMYvRN7+m+axaKoj0xpMzduG6Q1be5wy SK7JCMUmXnH9H6jaBsl/sHnJ8yK3/kQ= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-392-QstGpWiMOWmFp8ST5XXHIg-1; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:56:14 -0500 X-MC-Unique: QstGpWiMOWmFp8ST5XXHIg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65CE7185A794; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:56:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.81]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 672162026D4B; Mon, 12 Dec 2022 11:56:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: DJ Delorie via Libc-alpha Cc: Zack Weinberg , DJ Delorie Subject: Re: [PATCH] malloc: Use correct C11 atomics for fastbin References: Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2022 12:56:09 +0100 In-Reply-To: (DJ Delorie via Libc-alpha's message of "Tue, 06 Dec 2022 11:19:21 -0500") Message-ID: <87r0x4suna.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.4 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: * DJ Delorie via Libc-alpha: > Zack Weinberg via Libc-alpha writes: >> Every time we start talking about fastbins vs tcache again I start >> wondering, again, what's stopping us from replacing the entire malloc >> implementation with jemalloc, > > There's a couple of things, but they're technical details, not political > ones: > > * There's a copy of a "mini-malloc" in the dynamic loader that needs to > be somewhat compatible with the full copy in libc.so so that data > allocated in the loader can be used later. This is not actually true, no compatibility is required. We have manual tracking for allocations and avoid freeing them with the wrong allocator. Otherwise interposed mallocs wouldn't work. Thanks, Florian