Re: CFT: snmalloc as libc malloc

David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org> wrote on 2023-02-09 at 12:08:49:

> For the few yearsI've been running locally with snmalloc as the malloc 
> in libc.  Eventually I'd like to propose this for upstreaming but it 
> needs some wider testing first.

Very interesting.

> The branch is here:
> 
> https://github.com/davidchisnall/freebsd-src/tree/snmalloc2
> 
> It adds snmalloc as a submodule in contrib.  FreeBSD is allergic to 
> submodules, so upstreaming will need to replace this with something more 
> complicated.  You should be able to cherry-pick the top commit on any 
> vaguely-recent -CURRENT.
> 
> You should also be able to build the libc from this branch against the 
> version that you're running and try it with LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
> 
> I'd love to hear feedback on:
> 
>   - Performance, especially workloads where snmalloc does badly.
>   - RSS usage (again, especially workloads where snmalloc does badly).
>   - Anything that breaks.

Do you know how much work it would be to test with 13/stable
instead of current?

For a while now I have been collecting Privoxy TLS benchmarks [0]
using ElectroBSD (which is currently based on FreeBSD stable/13)
and various TLS libraries and would like to know if snmalloc
affects the benchmark results.

Fabian

[0] <https://www.fabiankeil.de/gehacktes/privoxy-tls-benchmarks/>