Hi Benoit, Though i should explain why i dont think issue 9 can be closed yet.
Conceived reason why it still is needed in my mind. So buffer space is as such after loading it with some data Pointer Size State 1 1m full 2 2m full 3 1m full 4 2m full 5 1m full 6 2m full 7 1m full I then free, pointers, 1,3,5 and 7. Pointer Size State 1 1m free 2 2m full 3 1m free 4 2m full 5 1m free 6 2m full 7 1m free I then want to put 2m in the cache. I cant but there is 4m actually avail, needs defrag. So atm im -1 for closing this story, i think the merging memory is a great idea, as it gives a quick win, without a more expensive defrag, but still think a defrag routine or algo is needed for the above. On 2 Mar 2012, at 07:22, Michael André Pearce wrote: > I think you may want some defragmentation still, especially if the buffers a > fair % full and the free pointers are spread, would mean that if any larger > object that the free pointers arent large enough for, but in total could > hold, without defrag would mean wouldn't be able to store. > > > On 2 Mar 2012, at 07:15, Benoit Perroud wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> Now with DIRECTMEMORY-40 done and a new slab's style allocator, I >> wonder if DIRECTMEMORY-9 is still relevant or if it could also be >> closed. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Benoit. >
