Marek Olšák <mar...@gmail.com> writes: > I'd like to have more feedback on the idea of using jemalloc for ralloc. > > Right now, I see these options: > > 1) Use jemalloc for ralloc and make it mandatory for all GL drivers. > - Distributions have shown that they are capable of doing anything > with the Mesa source code, so they don't need --disable-jemalloc. > - Reasonable people should build Mesa as-is. > > 2) Abandon the idea. > - The availability of --disable-jemalloc would send a clear message > that "you don't have to enable this", therefore the whole idea of > using jemalloc in Mesa would be pointless.
I'm generally of the opinion that if malloc is taking 10% of compile time, we're screwing up and we should just go fix that. However, this is an easy fix and doesn't prevent going and fixing malloc abuse later. I also don't like configure options -- they're mostly a chance to build things wrong. I'm concerned that by shared linking against jemalloc we're going to run into similar problems to every other time we shared link against things and it's going to make our lives harder. This is probably "we should figure out how to stop shared linking against anything" rather than "we shouldn't make this change", though.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
