Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "getmallocusag".
Did you mean:
getmallocusage
2014 Apr 28
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] [PATCH] Fix for sys::Process::GetMallocUsage() when using ptmalloc2 allocator in glibc
...ey really want to. For the static
case something like libbfd could help provided the symbol table was
still around.
It seems to me whatever we do is going to incur some overhead. Calling
dlsym() sounds a little bit expensive so we might be best off doing
the test on the first call to sys::Process::GetMallocUsage() and
storing a static variable that indicates the result of the test so we
don't need to do it again on subsequent calls to GetMallocUsage().
This would mean if an application decided to change its allocator
during execution GetMallocUsage() might break but changing the
allocator during execu...
2014 Apr 22
2
[LLVMdev] [RFC] [PATCH] Fix for sys::Process::GetMallocUsage() when using ptmalloc2 allocator in glibc
Hi,
This is a proposed fix for bug 16847 [1]. It is essentially the patch
provided by Martin Nowack in the bug report but I have added a test
case and an ifdef macro around the modified code in
Process::GetMallocUsage()
The issue seems to be that the ptmalloc2 allocator used in glibc (in
my case 2.19) does not include mmap()'ed memory in mallinfo.uordblks
and so mallinfo.hblkhd needs to be added to the value that
Process::GetMallocUsage() will return.
Another easy way to see this issue (other than running...
2018 Feb 09
0
-mllvm -track-memory precision
Hi,
How reliable are the numbers provided by LLVM timers when -mllvm -track-memory is enabled?
At least on my machine (OS X) they were more than the order of magnitude wrong.
Am I using the feature in the wrong way, or is Process::getMallocUsage() known in general to be unreliable?
If latter is the case, perhaps we should remove the easily accessible option for memory usage?
George