-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
Bugfixes in FX data allocation #4783
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
1960066
Bugfixes in FX data allocation
DedeHai 04c9c93
only allow realloc() for pixelbuffer if it grows + bugfix
DedeHai 633eb04
reverting realloc() block as it was cleaner before
DedeHai 3ce0cc7
added realloc_malloc functions, increased min heap constant
DedeHai 716da32
adding missing function declare
DedeHai File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a misleading comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it is what I have seen in tests: when using realloc, fragmentation was worse. When using free/malloc it was somewhat better but both approaches do cause fragmentation. The idea behind this is that free + malloc allows it to fill gaps left behind.
Got any test scenario that is good to test which works better in practice?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The sole purpose of realloc() functions is to reduce fragmentation. free + malloc will only fill gaps if garbage collector did its job. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of MM on ESP platforms.
IIRC @softhack007 was having a lot of issues with memory fragmentation in the past but I no longer remember what was the outcome (except that FX memory is no longer released and it only grows once allocated).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
there is zero garbage collection, its first come, first serve from the bottom up.
so if a block of memory divides a larger block, free -> malloc should move it to the bottom, realloc will keep it there if it fits.
Using realloc can prevent fragmentation but it can also make it worse if large buffers are at play. At least that is my understanding and also what I have seen in tests.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then go a step further and simplify p_realloc and d_realloc to use p_free/p_malloc and d_free/d_malloc instead.
It is the cleanest solution.
However ESP8266 will need the same.