musl - Re: Re: The heap memory performance (malloc/free/realloc) is significantly degraded in musl 1.2 (compared to 1.1)

Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2022092008470636285288@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 08:47:07 +0800
From: baiyang <baiyang@...il.com>
To: "Rich Felker" <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: Re: The heap memory performance (malloc/free/realloc) is significantly degraded in musl 1.2 (compared to 1.1)

> Would it be possible to limit use of the list to actually requesting
> help or making reports, rather than inciting debates about what is UB
> or what the consequences of UB might be?

You are right. 

The real question is: if we only need malloc_usable_size to return the size actually allocated internally (not the size requested by the user, **just as musl version 1.1 and all other libc implementations do**), is it possible to improve its time and space efficiency?

Thanks :-)

--

   Best Regards
  BaiYang
  baiyang@...il.com
  http://i.baiy.cn
**** < END OF EMAIL > **** 

From: Rich Felker
Date: 2022-09-20 08:38
To: baiyang
CC: musl
Subject: Re: Re: [musl] The heap memory performance (malloc/free/realloc) is significantly degraded in musl 1.2 (compared to 1.1)
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 08:25:52AM +0800, baiyang wrote:
> As Gabriel said, it's not a UB. Contrarily, it is a bug in gcc's Msan.
> Just read more on this thread :-) 

Would it be possible to limit use of the list to actually requesting
help or making reports, rather than inciting debates about what is UB
or what the consequences of UB might be?

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.