Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 9 Jul 2001 23:29:03 -0400 | | From | Michael Bacarella <> |
| |
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 11:01:51PM -0400, jlnance@intrex.net wrote: > Next I patched the hoard allocator so that instead of calling mmap(0, ...) > it would call it as something like mmap(0x10000000, ...) which causes it > to start allocating memory that would normally be reserved for sbrk(). > I think I could get close to 2.5G from the hoard malloc after this patch. > This change got incorporated into the latest hoard, but I had problems > building the latest hoard, so you may want to wait for a future release. > > Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that there are some glibc issues that > are more restrictive than the kernel issues.
dietlibc is pretty funky:
http://www.fefe.de/dietlibc/
I'm not sure if it's memory usage patterns are all that different from glibc (as I haven't checked). If so, it may still be easier to hack than something as uh.. established.. as glibc.
-- Michael Bacarella <mbac@nyct.net> Technical Staff / System Development, New York Connect.Net, Ltd. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |