Fix unnecessarily clearing clean memory in codegen #14710
Conversation
This file contains 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
ysbaddaden
reviewed
Jun 14, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you @BlobCodes!
Having the allocating functions always initialize the memory feels more like Crystal. Then we can introduce "unsafe" or "uninitialized" alternatives for #14687 ❤️
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Closes #14677
Closes #14678
Alternative to / closes #14679
Since #14679 doesn't seem to be received as well as I'd hoped, this is a very condensed version of it, which only does what's necessary to remove the double-clearing of memory.
With this PR, both
__crystal_malloc64and__crystal_malloc_atomic64are expected to return cleared memory.To make the change as simple as possible,
GC.malloc_atomicis now also required to return cleared memory.This could break compatibility with other/older stdlibs.
The performance benefits are the same as shown in #14679.