1 | \chapter{Allocator} |
---|
2 | |
---|
3 | ==================== |
---|
4 | |
---|
5 | Writing Points: |
---|
6 | |
---|
7 | Objective of uHeapLmmm. |
---|
8 | Design philosophy. |
---|
9 | Background and previous design of uHeapLmmm. |
---|
10 | |
---|
11 | Distributed design of uHeapLmmm. |
---|
12 | ----- SHOULD WE GIVE IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS HERE? ----- |
---|
13 | > figure. |
---|
14 | > Advantages of distributed design. |
---|
15 | |
---|
16 | The new features added to uHeapLmmm (incl. malloc_size routine) |
---|
17 | CFA alloc interface with examples. |
---|
18 | > Why did we need it? |
---|
19 | > The added benefits. |
---|
20 | ----- SHOULD WE GIVE PERFORMANCE AND USABILITY COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT INTERFACES THAT WE TRIED? ----- |
---|
21 | |
---|
22 | Performance evaluation using u-benchmark suite. |
---|
23 | |
---|
24 | ==================== |
---|
25 | |
---|
26 | \newpage |
---|
27 | \paragraph{Design 1: Decentralized} |
---|
28 | Fixed number of heaps: shard the heap into N heaps each with a bump-area allocated from the sbrk area. |
---|
29 | Kernel threads (KT) are assigned to the N heaps. |
---|
30 | When KTs $\le$ N, the heaps are uncontented. |
---|
31 | When KTs $>$ N, the heaps are contented. |
---|
32 | By adjusting N, this approach reduces storage at the cost of speed due to contention. |
---|
33 | In all cases, a thread acquires/releases a lock, contented or uncontented. |
---|
34 | \begin{cquote} |
---|
35 | \centering |
---|
36 | \input{AllocDS1} |
---|
37 | \end{cquote} |
---|
38 | Problems: need to know when a KT is created and destroyed to know when to create/delete the KT's heap. |
---|
39 | On KT deletion, its heap freed-storage needs to be distributed somewhere. |
---|
40 | |
---|
41 | \paragraph{Design 2: Centralized} |
---|
42 | |
---|
43 | One heap, but lower bucket sizes are N-shared across KTs. |
---|
44 | This design leverages the fact that 95\% of allocation requests are less than 512 bytes and there are only 3--5 different request sizes. |
---|
45 | When KTs $\le$ N, the important bucket sizes are uncontented. |
---|
46 | When KTs $>$ N, the free buckets are contented. |
---|
47 | Therefore, threads are only contending for a small number of buckets, which are distributed among them to reduce contention. |
---|
48 | \begin{cquote} |
---|
49 | \centering |
---|
50 | \input{AllocDS2} |
---|
51 | \end{cquote} |
---|
52 | Problems: need to know when a kernel thread (KT) is created and destroyed to know when to assign a shared bucket-number. |
---|
53 | When no thread is assigned a bucket number, its free storage is unavailable. |
---|
54 | It is possible to use sharing and stealing techniques to share/find unused storage, when a free list is unused or empty. |
---|