You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
At the moment we use the linked-list-allocator crate.
While it works fine, it is a very naive allocator and clearly isn't meant to be used when the load of allocations/deallocations is heavy.
Additionally, the allocator is single-threaded and is wrapped around a Spinlock. Multiple CPUs cannot at the moment allocate memory in parallel.
It would be rather hard to measure how much time the kernel spends inside of the memory allocator, but I can totally imagine a world where it is the allocator that is currently the biggest choke point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Note that 256µs remains a lot even from within an emulator. The time malloc takes on a desktop computer is more in the range of the hundreds of nanoseconds.
At the moment we use the
linked-list-allocator
crate.While it works fine, it is a very naive allocator and clearly isn't meant to be used when the load of allocations/deallocations is heavy.
Additionally, the allocator is single-threaded and is wrapped around a
Spinlock
. Multiple CPUs cannot at the moment allocate memory in parallel.It would be rather hard to measure how much time the kernel spends inside of the memory allocator, but I can totally imagine a world where it is the allocator that is currently the biggest choke point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: