Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: removal of brk()/sbrk().
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/28/2002 18:57:53
In article <20020228172258.F447@snowdrop.l8s.co.uk>,
David Laight <email@example.com> wrote:
>Was just an example, there are loads of programs out there that
>rely on features of old implementations that have been kept
>Does the netbsd malloc still support:
> x = malloc( 20 );
> free( x );
> x = realloc( x, 10 );
>which is why it is called 'realloc'....
That never worked on BSD, since the days of Chris Kingsley's malloc
[circa 1982]. I am not sure if unmaintained code from those days will
even compile with today's compilers.
>I don't actually see why there is a gain from using mmap() directly
>for malloc()? The program data area is (effectively) an extensible
>area loaded from the program file (then zeros) that is written to
>swap. An mmap()ed piece of /dev/zeros will be exactly the same.
>What you probably lose is address space fragmentation and memory
you assume that memory on modern machines is contiguous...