cryptoad added a comment. In D86694#2277371 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D86694#2277371>, @aganea wrote:
> @cryptoad What happens if the primary was much smaller? Or if pages were > //reserved// in much smaller ranges? The Primary can be made smaller, but this works better with the Standalone version as some code was added to fallback to larger class sizes if a region is full (Android uses 256mb per region). > @cryptoad Does SCUDO standalone differs in any of these aspects from this > version? So this requires a bit of background. There are two models for the Thread Specific Data that holds the cached pointers: Shared (a pool of N caches is shared between all threads) and Exclusive (1 exclusive cache per thread). For my initial port to Windows, I used the Shared model, with a pool of 32 caches max (it's a define in the platform header). If there is more than 32 cores, this can be increased. I didn't try to make the Exclusive version work, mostly because I was using the Windows TLS API and the Shared fit right in with those, but it would get rid of a lot of the contention. Overall with regard to the Standalone, it should be better on all accounts: faster (as we got rid of some of the quirks of sanitizer_common), lesser memory footprint, better reclaiming, more configurable. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D86694/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D86694 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
