3 ms·

well one of the stated goals of musl is to be simple and correct, and all those mallocs are anything but simple

• littlestymaar 6y ago
  That's true for jemalloc, but mimalloc is pretty simple. The reference paper is pretty short and really accessible and IIRC the implementation is around 5klocs. I doubt musl's implementation would much simpler than this.
  • dalias 6y ago
    5kloc is about 10x larger than musl's existing (old) malloc in source lines. I suspect lots of that is low code density, comments, etc. I have to lookup what exactly mimalloc is/does every time someone mentions it, because the readme/documentation isn't very descriptive except discussing extensions outside the normal API. I didn't have time to dig through this again today. But I did look at it in some depth on several occasions in the past and it really wasn't suitable for or comparable to what we're doing in musl.
    • littlestymaar 6y ago
      Thanks for clarification, didn't imagine that musl's malloc was that minimalist. You should definitely have a look at the paper [1] it's only ten page long! (Excluding benchmarks and references) [1]: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2019/06/mimalloc-tr-v1.pdf https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2019/0...