The branch, master has been updated
via 03e880931d0 doc: Update doc about talloc vs malloc speed
via a66db6c16e4 lib:talloc: Use tabs to align output in speed test
via 39c13f062a8 lib:talloc: Increase alloc size to 128 kilobytes
via 00d5982da2f lib:talloc: Don't optimize the speed test
via b6bf9cba80e lib:talloc: Add talloc_zero vs calloc test
via 8dddea2ceda lib:talloc: Use memset_s() to avoid the call gets
optimized out
via 6812e30be35 lib:talloc: Remove trailing spaces from testsuite.c
from 20a3a94e06a lib:ldb: Document environment variables in ldb manpage
https://git.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=shortlog;h=master
- Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
commit 03e880931d0a6171826f5ffc33e7b4d86eea54a6
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Wed Mar 29 11:04:38 2023 +0200
doc: Update doc about talloc vs malloc speed
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
Autobuild-User(master): Martin Schwenke <mart...@samba.org>
Autobuild-Date(master): Sat Sep 28 01:20:01 UTC 2024 on atb-devel-224
commit a66db6c16e4225e200da7f6f939b756026cee61f
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Thu Apr 27 11:31:07 2023 +0200
lib:talloc: Use tabs to align output in speed test
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
commit 39c13f062a859d17b5be3a2a02fece8d0b1819f1
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Thu Apr 27 11:24:59 2023 +0200
lib:talloc: Increase alloc size to 128 kilobytes
We want to avoid that the optimizer will use stack allocations. This way
the test should be a bit more realistic.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
commit 00d5982da2f5f2595b634b957c7d0b990e12b37b
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Mon Apr 17 09:25:48 2023 +0200
lib:talloc: Don't optimize the speed test
If the speed test gets optimized, the malloc() and free() might be
replaced by stack allocations.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
commit b6bf9cba80e55ca5aac3611e55dc952782c867c7
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Fri Apr 14 21:34:59 2023 +0200
lib:talloc: Add talloc_zero vs calloc test
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
commit 8dddea2ceda40f2365bd6b1a62826b84dc523b74
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Tue Feb 13 09:22:56 2024 +0100
lib:talloc: Use memset_s() to avoid the call gets optimized out
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
commit 6812e30be35508db3ac23406243fe08da9cf3084
Author: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Date: Tue Feb 6 18:03:22 2024 +0100
lib:talloc: Remove trailing spaces from testsuite.c
Signed-off-by: Andreas Schneider <a...@samba.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Schwenke <mar...@meltin.net>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of changes:
lib/talloc/doc/mainpage.dox | 10 ++--
lib/talloc/man/talloc.3.xml | 12 ++--
lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt | 11 ++--
lib/talloc/testsuite.c | 142 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
lib/talloc/wscript | 2 +-
5 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
Changeset truncated at 500 lines:
diff --git a/lib/talloc/doc/mainpage.dox b/lib/talloc/doc/mainpage.dox
index ece6ccb8f0c..d881e503a43 100644
--- a/lib/talloc/doc/mainpage.dox
+++ b/lib/talloc/doc/mainpage.dox
@@ -69,11 +69,11 @@
* @section talloc_performance Performance
*
* All the additional features of talloc() over malloc() do come at a price. We
- * have a simple performance test in Samba4 that measures talloc() versus
- * malloc() performance, and it seems that talloc() is about 4% slower than
- * malloc() on my x86 Debian Linux box. For Samba, the great reduction in code
- * complexity that we get by using talloc makes this worthwhile, especially as
- * the total overhead of talloc/malloc in Samba is already quite small.
+ * have a performance test in Samba that measures talloc() versus malloc()
+ * performance, and it seems that talloc() is about 50% slower than malloc()
+ * (AMD Ryzen 9 3900X). For Samba, the great reduction in code complexity that
+ * we get by using talloc makes this worthwhile, especially as the total
+ * overhead of talloc/malloc in Samba is already quite small.
*
* @section talloc_named Named blocks
*
diff --git a/lib/talloc/man/talloc.3.xml b/lib/talloc/man/talloc.3.xml
index c51061fce1f..e26b16dbecf 100644
--- a/lib/talloc/man/talloc.3.xml
+++ b/lib/talloc/man/talloc.3.xml
@@ -767,12 +767,12 @@ if (ptr) memcpy(ptr, p, strlen(p)+1);</programlisting>
<refsect1><title>PERFORMANCE</title>
<para>
All the additional features of talloc(3) over malloc(3) do come at a
- price. We have a simple performance test in Samba4 that measures
- talloc() versus malloc() performance, and it seems that talloc() is
- about 10% slower than malloc() on my x86 Debian Linux box. For
- Samba, the great reduction in code complexity that we get by using
- talloc makes this worthwhile, especially as the total overhead of
- talloc/malloc in Samba is already quite small.
+ price. We have a performance test in Samba that measures talloc() versus
+ malloc() performance, and it seems that talloc() is
+ about 50% slower than malloc() (AMD Ryzen 9 3900X). For Samba, the great
+ reduction in code complexity that we get by using talloc makes this
+ worthwhile, especially as the total overhead of talloc/malloc in Samba
+ is already quite small.
</para>
</refsect1>
<refsect1><title>SEE ALSO</title>
diff --git a/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt b/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
index dedda6c0678..d6e3646a1bd 100644
--- a/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
+++ b/lib/talloc/talloc_guide.txt
@@ -43,12 +43,11 @@ testsuite.c to clarify how some particular situation is
handled.
Performance
-----------
-All the additional features of talloc() over malloc() do come at a
-price. We have a simple performance test in Samba4 that measures
-talloc() versus malloc() performance, and it seems that talloc() is
-about 4% slower than malloc() on my x86 Debian Linux box. For Samba,
-the great reduction in code complexity that we get by using talloc
-makes this worthwhile, especially as the total overhead of
+All the additional features of talloc() over malloc() do come at a price. We
+have a performance test in Samba4 that measures talloc() versus malloc()
+performance, and it seems that talloc() is about 50% slower than malloc() (AMD
+Ryzen 9 3900X). For Samba, the great reduction in code complexity that we get
by
+using talloc makes this worthwhile, especially as the total overhead of
talloc/malloc in Samba is already quite small.
diff --git a/lib/talloc/testsuite.c b/lib/talloc/testsuite.c
index 282ebc6956d..dc0039940ff 100644
--- a/lib/talloc/testsuite.c
+++ b/lib/talloc/testsuite.c
@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
-/*
+/*
Unix SMB/CIFS implementation.
local testing of talloc routines.
Copyright (C) Andrew Tridgell 2004
-
+
** NOTE! The following LGPL license applies to the talloc
** library. This does NOT imply that all of Samba is released
** under the LGPL
-
+
This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
@@ -42,6 +42,14 @@
#include "talloc_testsuite.h"
+#ifndef disable_optimization
+#if __has_attribute(optimize)
+#define disable_optimization __attribute__((optimize("O0")))
+#else /* disable_optimization */
+#define disable_optimization
+#endif
+#endif /* disable_optimization */
+
static struct timeval private_timeval_current(void)
{
struct timeval tv;
@@ -52,7 +60,7 @@ static struct timeval private_timeval_current(void)
static double private_timeval_elapsed(struct timeval *tv)
{
struct timeval tv2 = private_timeval_current();
- return (tv2.tv_sec - tv->tv_sec) +
+ return (tv2.tv_sec - tv->tv_sec) +
(tv2.tv_usec - tv->tv_usec)*1.0e-6;
}
@@ -135,7 +143,7 @@ static void test_log_stdout(const char *message)
}
/*
- test references
+ test references
*/
static bool test_ref1(void)
{
@@ -150,7 +158,7 @@ static bool test_ref1(void)
talloc_named_const(p1, 2, "x2");
talloc_named_const(p1, 3, "x3");
- r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
+ r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
ref = talloc_reference(r1, p2);
talloc_report_full(root, stderr);
@@ -192,7 +200,7 @@ static bool test_ref1(void)
}
/*
- test references
+ test references
*/
static bool test_ref2(void)
{
@@ -206,7 +214,7 @@ static bool test_ref2(void)
talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "x3");
p2 = talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "p2");
- r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
+ r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
ref = talloc_reference(r1, p2);
talloc_report_full(root, stderr);
@@ -247,7 +255,7 @@ static bool test_ref2(void)
}
/*
- test references
+ test references
*/
static bool test_ref3(void)
{
@@ -287,7 +295,7 @@ static bool test_ref3(void)
}
/*
- test references
+ test references
*/
static bool test_ref4(void)
{
@@ -302,7 +310,7 @@ static bool test_ref4(void)
talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "x3");
p2 = talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "p2");
- r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
+ r1 = talloc_named_const(root, 1, "r1");
ref = talloc_reference(r1, p2);
talloc_report_full(root, stderr);
@@ -338,7 +346,7 @@ static bool test_ref4(void)
/*
- test references
+ test references
*/
static bool test_unlink1(void)
{
@@ -353,7 +361,7 @@ static bool test_unlink1(void)
talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "x3");
p2 = talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "p2");
- r1 = talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "r1");
+ r1 = talloc_named_const(p1, 1, "r1");
ref = talloc_reference(r1, p2);
talloc_report_full(root, stderr);
@@ -439,11 +447,11 @@ static bool test_misc(void)
CHECK_BLOCKS("misc", p1, 2);
CHECK_BLOCKS("misc", root, 3);
- torture_assert("misc", talloc_free(NULL) == -1,
+ torture_assert("misc", talloc_free(NULL) == -1,
"talloc_free(NULL) should give -1\n");
talloc_set_destructor(p1, fail_destructor);
- torture_assert("misc", talloc_free(p1) == -1,
+ torture_assert("misc", talloc_free(p1) == -1,
"Failed destructor should cause talloc_free to fail\n");
talloc_set_destructor(p1, NULL);
@@ -458,10 +466,10 @@ static bool test_misc(void)
"failed: strdup on NULL should give NULL\n");
p2 = talloc_strndup(p1, "foo", 2);
- torture_assert("misc", strcmp("fo", p2) == 0,
+ torture_assert("misc", strcmp("fo", p2) == 0,
"strndup doesn't work\n");
p2 = talloc_asprintf_append_buffer(p2, "o%c", 'd');
- torture_assert("misc", strcmp("food", p2) == 0,
+ torture_assert("misc", strcmp("food", p2) == 0,
"talloc_asprintf_append_buffer doesn't
work\n");
CHECK_BLOCKS("misc", p2, 1);
CHECK_BLOCKS("misc", p1, 3);
@@ -634,7 +642,7 @@ static bool test_realloc_child(void)
el1->list3 = talloc(el1, struct el2 *);
el1->list3[0] = talloc(el1->list3, struct el2);
el1->list3[0]->name = talloc_strdup(el1->list3[0], "testing2");
-
+
el2 = talloc(el1->list, struct el2);
CHECK_PARENT("el2", el2, el1->list);
el2_2 = talloc(el1->list2, struct el2);
@@ -742,7 +750,7 @@ static bool test_steal(void)
talloc_steal(root, p2);
CHECK_BLOCKS("steal", root, 2);
CHECK_SIZE("steal", root, 20);
-
+
talloc_free(p2);
CHECK_BLOCKS("steal", root, 1);
@@ -851,9 +859,14 @@ static bool test_unref_reparent(void)
return true;
}
+/* Make the size big enough to not fit into the stack */
+#define ALLOC_SIZE (128 * 1024)
+#define ALLOC_DUP_STRING "talloc talloc talloc talloc talloc talloc talloc"
+
/*
measure the speed of talloc versus malloc
*/
+static bool test_speed(void) disable_optimization;
static bool test_speed(void)
{
void *ctx = talloc_new(NULL);
@@ -869,9 +882,9 @@ static bool test_speed(void)
do {
void *p1, *p2, *p3;
for (i=0;i<loop;i++) {
- p1 = talloc_size(ctx, loop % 100);
- p2 = talloc_strdup(p1, "foo bar");
- p3 = talloc_size(p1, 300);
+ p1 = talloc_size(ctx, loop % ALLOC_SIZE);
+ p2 = talloc_strdup(p1, ALLOC_DUP_STRING);
+ p3 = talloc_size(p1, ALLOC_SIZE);
(void)p2;
(void)p3;
talloc_free(p1);
@@ -879,20 +892,20 @@ static bool test_speed(void)
count += 3 * loop;
} while (private_timeval_elapsed(&tv) < 5.0);
- fprintf(stderr, "talloc: %.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+ fprintf(stderr, "talloc:\t\t%.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
talloc_free(ctx);
- ctx = talloc_pool(NULL, 1024);
+ ctx = talloc_pool(NULL, ALLOC_SIZE * 2);
tv = private_timeval_current();
count = 0;
do {
void *p1, *p2, *p3;
for (i=0;i<loop;i++) {
- p1 = talloc_size(ctx, loop % 100);
- p2 = talloc_strdup(p1, "foo bar");
- p3 = talloc_size(p1, 300);
+ p1 = talloc_size(ctx, loop % ALLOC_SIZE);
+ p2 = talloc_strdup(p1, ALLOC_DUP_STRING);
+ p3 = talloc_size(p1, ALLOC_SIZE);
(void)p2;
(void)p3;
talloc_free(p1);
@@ -902,23 +915,62 @@ static bool test_speed(void)
talloc_free(ctx);
- fprintf(stderr, "talloc_pool: %.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+ fprintf(stderr, "talloc_pool:\t%.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+
+ tv = private_timeval_current();
+ count = 0;
+ do {
+ void *p1, *p2, *p3;
+ for (i=0;i<loop;i++) {
+ p1 = malloc(loop % ALLOC_SIZE);
+ p2 = strdup(ALLOC_DUP_STRING);
+ p3 = malloc(ALLOC_SIZE);
+ free(p1);
+ free(p2);
+ free(p3);
+ }
+ count += 3 * loop;
+ } while (private_timeval_elapsed(&tv) < 5.0);
+ fprintf(stderr, "malloc:\t\t%.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+
+ printf("\n# TALLOC_ZERO VS CALLOC SPEED\n");
+
+ ctx = talloc_new(NULL);
+
+ tv = private_timeval_current();
+ count = 0;
+ do {
+ void *p1, *p2, *p3;
+ for (i=0;i<loop;i++) {
+ p1 = talloc_zero_size(ctx, loop % ALLOC_SIZE);
+ p2 = talloc_strdup(p1, ALLOC_DUP_STRING);
+ p3 = talloc_zero_size(p1, ALLOC_SIZE);
+ (void)p2;
+ (void)p3;
+ talloc_free(p1);
+ }
+ count += 3 * loop;
+ } while (private_timeval_elapsed(&tv) < 5.0);
+
+ fprintf(stderr, "talloc_zero:\t%.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+
+ talloc_free(ctx);
tv = private_timeval_current();
count = 0;
do {
void *p1, *p2, *p3;
for (i=0;i<loop;i++) {
- p1 = malloc(loop % 100);
- p2 = strdup("foo bar");
- p3 = malloc(300);
+ p1 = calloc(1, loop % ALLOC_SIZE);
+ p2 = strdup(ALLOC_DUP_STRING);
+ p3 = calloc(1, ALLOC_SIZE);
free(p1);
free(p2);
free(p3);
}
count += 3 * loop;
} while (private_timeval_elapsed(&tv) < 5.0);
- fprintf(stderr, "malloc: %.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
+ fprintf(stderr, "calloc:\t\t%.0f ops/sec\n",
count/private_timeval_elapsed(&tv));
printf("success: speed\n");
@@ -928,15 +980,15 @@ static bool test_speed(void)
static bool test_lifeless(void)
{
void *top = talloc_new(NULL);
- char *parent, *child;
+ char *parent, *child;
void *child_owner = talloc_new(NULL);
printf("test: lifeless\n# TALLOC_UNLINK LOOP\n");
parent = talloc_strdup(top, "parent");
- child = talloc_strdup(parent, "child");
+ child = talloc_strdup(parent, "child");
(void)talloc_reference(child, parent);
- (void)talloc_reference(child_owner, child);
+ (void)talloc_reference(child_owner, child);
talloc_report_full(top, stderr);
talloc_unlink(top, parent);
talloc_unlink(top, child);
@@ -969,7 +1021,7 @@ static bool test_loop(void)
parent = talloc_strdup(top, "parent");
req1 = talloc(parent, struct req1);
- req1->req2 = talloc_strdup(req1, "req2");
+ req1->req2 = talloc_strdup(req1, "req2");
talloc_set_destructor(req1->req2, test_loop_destructor);
req1->req3 = talloc_strdup(req1, "req3");
(void)talloc_reference(req1->req3, req1);
@@ -979,7 +1031,7 @@ static bool test_loop(void)
talloc_report_full(NULL, stderr);
talloc_free(top);
- torture_assert("loop", loop_destructor_count == 1,
+ torture_assert("loop", loop_destructor_count == 1,
"FAILED TO FIRE LOOP DESTRUCTOR\n");
loop_destructor_count = 0;
@@ -2097,7 +2149,7 @@ static bool test_magic_protection(void)
*
* Real attacks would attempt to set a real destructor.
*/
- memset(p1, '\0', 32);
+ memset_s(p1, 32, '\0', 32);
/* Then the attack takes effect when the memory's freed. */
talloc_free(pool);
@@ -2220,29 +2272,29 @@ bool torture_local_talloc(struct torture_context *tctx)
test_reset();
ret &= test_ref4();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_unlink1();
+ ret &= test_unlink1();
test_reset();
ret &= test_misc();
test_reset();
ret &= test_realloc();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_realloc_child();
+ ret &= test_realloc_child();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_steal();
+ ret &= test_steal();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_move();
+ ret &= test_move();
test_reset();
ret &= test_unref_reparent();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_realloc_fn();
+ ret &= test_realloc_fn();
test_reset();
ret &= test_type();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_lifeless();
+ ret &= test_lifeless();
test_reset();
ret &= test_loop();
test_reset();
- ret &= test_free_parent_deny_child();
+ ret &= test_free_parent_deny_child();
test_reset();
ret &= test_realloc_on_destructor_parent();
test_reset();
diff --git a/lib/talloc/wscript b/lib/talloc/wscript
index 8b5e02d36c5..1b240ae3653 100644
--- a/lib/talloc/wscript
+++ b/lib/talloc/wscript
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ def build(bld):
public_headers=[],
enabled=bld.env.TALLOC_COMPAT1)
- testsuite_deps = 'talloc'
+ testsuite_deps = 'talloc replace'
if bld.CONFIG_SET('HAVE_PTHREAD'):
testsuite_deps += ' pthread'
--
Samba Shared Repository
