vsk added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47551#1117086, @lhames wrote:
> LGTM. > > I haven't looked at process memory management. How hard would your FIXME be > to implement? After looking at this more carefully, I think the FIXME makes a bad prescription. It's based on the assumption that each platform-specific allocator makes use of an efficient API to make aligned allocations. This doesn't generally seem to be true, because the platform-specific allocators rely on mmap(). A better alternative might be to add a new API, `AllocatedMemoryCache::AllocateAlignedMemory(size, alignment)`. You could implement an alignment-aware allocator here, say, by splitting up free memory into a list of buckets (one list per alignment). Next, you could surface the API from `Process`, provided there's a fallback strategy when the allocated memory cache is disabled. One caveat to all of this is that it might not be worth doing unless fragmentation-related overhead is identified as a bottleneck. I'll remove the FIXME. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47551 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
