Re: Long time outdated jemalloc

Great! I'll take a look at that, as well as do the merge the typical way
(which only takes a few minutes now that I've bootstrapped things). I'll
compare the two to see what diffs there might be (to act as a cross check
for both methods). I'll then build a copy of the Netflix firmware with the
change and put it on a couple machines and see if they can handle the load
and if there are any performance regressions. I don't expect any, since
malloc typically doesn't appear in the flame graphs as "visible", but you
never know.

So, once that's done, and I expect it to be done this week, I'll push it
into main with both the proper vendor branch merge commits as well as an
acknowledgement for this pull request and your work to move it forward (I'm
just verifying the typical process will produce the same results and the
typical process doesn't take a long time, etc).

Warner

On Sun, Dec 8, 2024 at 9:03 AM Minsoo Choo <minsoochoo0122@proton.me> wrote:

> I resolved merge conflict by rebasing main. What's next?
>
> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1337
> On Sunday, December 1st, 2024 at 2:05 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
> wrote:
>
> (sorry to follow up to my own email and topposting)
>
> I got the vendor branch bootstrapped: I created vendor/jemalloc and tagged
> vendor/jemalloc/5.2.1,
> and created a merge commit from that branch to main. I had to tweak the
> FREEBSD-Xlist a little.I've not updated the other two FREEBSD-* files, but
> the steps were
> documented in the commit messages (the vendor branch one is especially
> long and
> likely should migrate into the developer handbook). FREEBSD-update is
> basically
> a shell script to do the same thing that git subtree merge does, though
> I'm sure some
> tweaks could help the next time (if there is a next time, jemalloc
> upstream seems to
> have slowed way down of late).
>
> Next up,I'll create 5.3.0 import on the vendor branch, do the merge and
> start testing (it will be
> Minsoo's pull request, rebased, with any conflicts resolved and merge
> commit recorded).
> But that will have to be tomorrow or more likely during the work week. I'm
> too tired tonight
> to get it right at the moment.
>
> And a special thanks to emaste for giving bz the right recipe for doing
> the subtree merge
> w/o git subtree for his work on the linux wifi drivers in the tree.
>
> Warner
>
> On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 9:38 PM Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>> Yea, I need to get a copy of jemalloc 5.3.0 and 5.2.1 to try to
>> 'bootstrap' the vendor branch.
>> Then I need to bootstrap it...
>>
>> I just did the same with edk2 (which had a vendor branch, but hadn't been
>> updated since svn times).
>> However, jemalloc doesn't have a vendor branch yet, so I'll have to
>> create that, but I'll start with the
>> current version rather than doing full history... So I'll start there.
>> I also just did awk and lua, so once I have things bootstrapped, I'll be
>> able to add 5.3.0 and then layer Minsoo's on
>> top of that and then start testing it somehow.
>>
>> Malloc makes me nervous to touch, honestly, but I'll give it a go and
>> test boot on my system and
>> maybe see if we can survive a workload at work w/o regressions... But I
>> can't do a full test with lots
>> of machines until after the first of the year (though I can do a couple
>> for a few days before then).
>>
>> So my next step is to bootstrap the vendor branch... I'll give that a try
>> tonight.
>>
>> Warner
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 30, 2024 at 8:26 PM Minsoo Choo <minsoochoo0122@proton.me>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have already submitted PR on github (
>>> https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/pull/1337) and phabricator (
>>> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421). I don't have access (commit bit)
>>> to freebsd git repo, so there is nothing I can do at this point since
>>> vendor import and landing patches requires commit bit.
>>> On Saturday, November 30th, 2024 at 1:42 PM, cglogic <
>>> cglogic@protonmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see, it happens.
>>> Maybe another committer will volunteer to do the update.
>>> I hope it will make its way into 15.0 release.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>> On Friday, November 29th, 2024 at 9:38 PM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I've been swamped. we need to bootstrap the vendor branch, and the way
>>> prior updates were done
>>> isn't so great.
>>>
>>> Warner
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 2:21 AM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello guys,
>>>>
>>>> How the update of jemalloc is going? It's November now.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> On Monday, July 22nd, 2024 at 7:02 PM, Minsoo Choo <
>>>> minsoochoo0122@proton.me> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> First, sorry for late response.
>>>>
>>>> cglogic, thank you for bringing up this issue again since I nearly
>>>> forgot that this issue was still open.
>>>>
>>>> Warner, as I can't access to my FreeBSD instance until the end of
>>>> August, but I can still edit and push the code through my Arm Mac. This
>>>> means that I can't test the updated code on my machine, but I can join the
>>>> review process and listen to change proposals.
>>>>
>>>> I'll open a Github PR in a few hours. (The phabricator review will stay
>>>> opened just in case)
>>>> On Monday, July 22nd, 2024 at 5:08 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 2:03 PM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sunday, July 21st, 2024 at 6:54 AM, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 1:59 AM cglogic <cglogic@protonmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello FreeBSD community,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After Jason Evans stepped aside from maintaining jemalloc in
>>>>>> FreeBSD, it's not updating in time anymore.
>>>>>> Version 5.3.0 was released May 6, 2022 and FreeBSD still not
>>>>>> imported it into the tree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a pending review https://reviews.freebsd.org/D41421 from Aug
>>>>>> 11, 2023.
>>>>>> I'm successfully running FreeBSD/amd64 system with D41421 applied for
>>>>>> 8 months, as well as many other people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can it be reviewed and committed to CURRENT?
>>>>>> Or, if there is no committers willing to do it, can commit bit be
>>>>>> given to submitter or another person willing to do this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's very disappointing when users spend their time to fill such gaps
>>>>>> and their efforts just ignored by the developers.
>>>>>> Every year FreeBSD Community Survey asking about user experience in
>>>>>> contributing to FreeBSD.
>>>>>> Here you can see an example of such contributing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> First, thank you for being persistent and continuing to bring it up.
>>>>> It's important to do that to make sure this (and your many other)
>>>>> contribution doesn't fall on the floor.
>>>>>
>>>>> And to be fair, we're only 3 months since the last update. Still,
>>>>> quite a bit longer than you should have to wait, but not nearly the year
>>>>> the original date suggests.
>>>>>
>>>>> And this is a perfect storm of "how the project is bad at accepting
>>>>> contributions":
>>>>> (1) The original submission was close to the 14 branch creation time.
>>>>> This meant that we weren't well prepared to look at it since it is such an
>>>>> invasive change (at least on its surface). It also slowed the initial
>>>>> response...
>>>>> (2) There was a number of back and forth requests for changes, which
>>>>> took time to sort out...
>>>>> (3) The size of this is huge, well beyond the capacity of Phabricator
>>>>> to review accurately...
>>>>> (4) It's a vendor import. That means we can't just drop the
>>>>> Phabricator review into the tree...
>>>>> (5) It's phabricator: this is a great tool for developers, but we have
>>>>> a terrible track record of using it for intake from new contributors. We
>>>>> don't have any oversight at all over this tool, at there's at best tepid
>>>>> and luke warm attempts to look for drop balls.
>>>>>
>>>>> All of these things are a terrible experience. I can only apologize.
>>>>> These days, we might steer this towards github, but the 'vendor import'
>>>>> means you really need someone on the inside, or you need to be on the
>>>>> inside to make that work.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, how to move forward? Well, I'd like to propose the following:
>>>>> (1) submit all the other Phabricator reviews you have open (they are
>>>>> mostly good, or close to good) to github. Github is being actively managed
>>>>> and will make it faster to get things it. It's a much better tool for new
>>>>> contributors (and even frequent contributors of smallish things).
>>>>> (2) I should do an vendor import of 5.3.0 from github, and do the
>>>>> merge to a branch and push that to github. You can then layer on your
>>>>> changes and those can be reviewed more closely as a pull request against
>>>>> the branch I push. I suspect that most of the issues are sorted out already
>>>>> (3) I'll land it via that route...
>>>>>
>>>>> And, if the sum of the other pull requests and this are good (and I
>>>>> suspect they will be), then we can talk about commit bits and such.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's experiences like this which is why I'm trying to stand up github
>>>>> pull requests as a reliable way to get things and and the best place to
>>>>> send people...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again for persisting, and also for expressing this criticism
>>>>> that we (hopefully) can use to make it better.
>>>>>
>>>>> Warner
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not the author of D41421. Just applied the patch to test it 8
>>>>> months ago. And recently discovered that it's still not committed.
>>>>> I can't copy your message to Phabricator because don't have an
>>>>> account. Please, if you have time, help the author in D41421.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ah yes. I've been in touch with the author for other things, and
>>>> somehow thought it was you.... I'll reach out to him via other means...
>>>>
>>>> Warner
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>