A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-July/143023.html below:

[llvm-dev] RFC: Replacing the default CRT allocator on Windows

[llvm-dev] RFC: Replacing the default CRT allocator on WindowsDavid Chisnall via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Thu Jul 2 05:03:53 PDT 2020
On 02/07/2020 05:20, Alexandre Ganea via llvm-dev wrote:
> Time to link clang.exe with LLD and -flto on 36-core:
> 
>    Windows CRT heap allocator: 38 min 47 sec
> 
>    mimalloc: 2 min 22 sec
> 
>    rpmalloc: 2 min 15 sec
> 
>    snmalloc: 2 min 19 sec


These numbers all seem very close (apart from the baseline).  How many 
runs did you do and what was the jitter?

FWIW, I'm using snmalloc on FreeBSD instead of jemalloc and clang is 
around 2% faster, so it might be worth considering this as an option for 
all platforms.  It's likely to be a big win on anything where dlmalloc 
is the default allocator.

Snmalloc currently supports macOS, Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, 
OpenBSD, Haiku, and OpenEnclave (adding other POSIXy systems is fairly 
trivial, can be completely trivial if you don't want any 
non-standard-POSIX behaviour) on x86, ARM, and PowerPC (RISC-V and MIPS 
under review).

I am obviously biased towards snmalloc, since I'm one of the authors, 
and happy to help out anyone wanting to integrate it with LLVM.  Note 
that snmalloc requires C++17, so would need to be conditional on LLVM 
being built with a vaguely modern compiler.

David

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4