[PATCH] D71786: RFC: [Support] On Windows, add optional support for rpmalloc

Tue Jun 30 10:18:23 PDT 2020

russell.gallop added a comment.

I notice that the improvements to rpmalloc for LLVM are still under discussion (https://github.com/mjansson/rpmalloc/issues/150) and targetted at rpmalloc v1.4.1.

Is the version in this review based on rpmalloc v1.4.0?

Is the plan to land this version as it fixes the concurrency issue then update to v1.4.1 to improve memory usage?

I wonder if it's possible to get this in for LLVM 11. Is it just wanting an okay on the licensing?

================
Comment at: llvm/lib/Support/rpmalloc/LICENSE:24
+
+For more information, please refer to <http://unlicense.org>
----------------
rnk wrote:
> My understanding is that lawyers do not like one-off licenses. However, I think there is a pretty clear case that rpmalloc is not critical functionality to LLVM, it is an implementation of a well-defined interface: malloc, and if we discover license complications down the road, we can always remove it without removing critical functionality. And if anyone finds this worrying today, they do not need to enable the rpmalloc build mode.
> 
> So, that is my non-authoritative, "not legal advice" rationalization that this should be OK. And, you did put all the code in the rpmalloc directory. So, I think this is fine.
I believe that rpmalloc can be licensed under the MIT license if the lawyers would be happier with this: https://github.com/mjansson/rpmalloc#license

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D71786/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D71786