From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: w32/w64 Emacs and gmalloc() Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:28:03 -0500 Message-ID: References: <831tymwge8.fsf@gnu.org> <8361nxvlon.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1393903761 14347 80.91.229.3 (4 Mar 2014 03:29:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 03:29:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: fabrice.popineau@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 04 04:29:29 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WKg2r-0006eX-A3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2014 04:29:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42787 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKg2q-0001yC-UB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:29:28 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34850) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKg2g-0001ww-3C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:29:25 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKg2X-0007vQ-48 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:29:18 -0500 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:58936) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WKg2W-0007vA-Vh; Mon, 03 Mar 2014 22:29:09 -0500 Original-Received: from fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.DIT.UMontreal.CA (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id s243T9Es005061; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:29:09 -0500 Original-Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 8AD31AE185; Mon, 3 Mar 2014 22:28:03 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <8361nxvlon.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 01 Mar 2014 20:05:44 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4870=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9362 : core <4870> : inlines <554> : streams <1132647> : uri <1688018> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:170118 Archived-At: >> I'm just pointing out that it can be improved a bit by exposing the >> "freeable_p" test and use it in sweep_foo so we don't even try to >> free blocks when the free would be ignored. Along the lines of the >> patch below. > Will this handle all the calls to xrealloc we have in the sources? Not sure what you mean. I think the answer is "no" because we're not trying to optimize all cases, only those that we (easily) can. Stefan