From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jonathan Yavner Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: GC: cons sweeping and cons block size Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 16:22:09 -0400 Message-ID: <200707031622.10136.jyavner@member.fsf.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1183494140 7277 80.91.229.12 (3 Jul 2007 20:22:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 20:22:20 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 03 22:22:19 2007 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1I5ot8-0005rh-Lr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:22:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ot7-00053M-QT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:22:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ot4-000534-PY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:22:14 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ot2-00051t-KH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:22:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I5ot2-00051q-DT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:22:12 -0400 Original-Received: from alnrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.225.92]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I5ot2-000533-4i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:22:12 -0400 Original-Received: from daddy (c-24-0-105-162.hsd1.nj.comcast.net[24.0.105.162]) by comcast.net (alnrmhc12) with ESMTP id <20070703202211b1200jtj1be>; Tue, 3 Jul 2007 20:22:11 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: NetCache Data OnTap 5.x X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:74254 Archived-At: > malloc()'ing 1K-aligned 1K-block is cheaper than 4K-aligned 4K-block, > and the latter allocation probably tends to a higher heap > fragmentation. On some systems, large malloc blocks go directly to MMAP_ANONYMOUS and so fragmentation worries are eliminated. I don't see any support for direct use of mmap() in gmalloc.c, though. Should we consider it? OS-specific code is needed -- Windoze calls it VirtualAlloc(), while MacOS calls it vm_alloc().