From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: When should ralloc.c be used? Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:51:31 -0400 Message-ID: <22E0C20F-9F24-41B2-A652-E72BA82083EA@raeburn.org> References: <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <838ttfnmev.fsf@gnu.org> <837f8znk8f.fsf@gnu.org> <83zilvm2ud.fsf@gnu.org> <83r377m0i8.fsf@gnu.org> <83eg36n6v5.fsf@gnu.org> <83shrl523p.fsf@gnu.org> <83oa28wgzb.fsf@gnu.org> <9F4BB1CC-0945-4254-94A0-DCEC30A09815@raeburn.org> <83lgxbuymm.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477558391 4281 195.159.176.226 (27 Oct 2016 08:53:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 08:53:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 27 10:53:07 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bzgQT-0006OQ-67 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 10:52:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39751 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzgQV-0003vd-NV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:52:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40232) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzgPT-0003nR-B4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:51:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzgPP-0001Gz-59 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:51:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qk0-x22e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22e]:33037) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bzgPP-0001GO-03 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 04:51:35 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qk0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id n189so35251225qke.0 for ; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 01:51:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raeburn-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8mq1Lub2gq8B324SyFI1adNZ2SPvxFPxJXbgdvbeIxk=; b=nVbDncR7k5XidM4F7hOFRqnDHeEdg8C/z8RCGAee01AEX5TS211YvEIAt1pKckB+4g JWuHVIUfs8xaCikAC2vOZESs8EkIkBKD8grvYHGIu366ZUJfwuwWq7xTanRoSRbSjnzQ fqavoTDlt7d1uSULMSDeGj1u5KAJKPgnI821zk9lgeLwl12OAyf8RZMwH9HZl+1kDMlK X4+hoE2e0+GIzJ8Ez0UP3swOQuHRiVvBafdxgDYeO/UPN70IiT3HLsL7h4gnDoU8EUbv neaeup0bndSkQe/3H069qdFlhX58uj27yLeaM8wsK9sxnfPLlnTeZe4ZpHRy21ll34BW 0O9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:mime-version:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=8mq1Lub2gq8B324SyFI1adNZ2SPvxFPxJXbgdvbeIxk=; b=NXQyWsSzHZLGquI+LBl1Cu6y1W+f5te1hlQhGxFgXSfdUXihQchgElfIHyt3lbtled V6hxKq5RExCQcD/LCdMxw8DAMcpkm669DC5N5vRkb2AXT27hNZWvjnsOtaDTRZZS6VHP LLeYyriPHl22EDS3ZWGrXUaTGIkYc0cIsEuYC3I2lMxAjV0kCTOKbOVNTourmBO+y4vw ZRf+b16VcWGoZ7828gOr38P6fS6lLcl7ZxSgtD3n4tEUgM06hLapvDh2Nc4rHzJEGor3 LvcA2BuqBXA1L1zvmqhg/XiZm+AjQ7UalzcE2bUR3Ql+LPxdTPdynF2RlZuSb1T7M4Mm pHQA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvcC5+tunOD6p6mdeIUtwPitFLDFJl6I6XuD+YsBazLX1eFmfAfmq7mkCcA7MJ2/zg== X-Received: by 10.55.221.217 with SMTP id u86mr5289140qku.214.1477558294283; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 01:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.23.52] (c-50-138-183-136.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [50.138.183.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l73sm3113572qke.26.2016.10.27.01.51.33 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 01:51:33 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83lgxbuymm.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208866 Archived-At: > I think we've lost context of the discussion. Please see above: this > is about the disadvantages of using mmap directly, i.e. for those > cases where the native malloc or gmalloc suffer from memory > fragmentation, and we decide to use mmap in buffer.c to countermand > that. Yes, sorry, I got a bit off track=E2=80=A6 Ken=