| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Correct various pre-processor defines for sparc64 and in mozjemalloc use the JS arm64 allocator on Linux/sparc64.
This corrects build problems opn Linux sparc64 and is in line with bugzilla bug #1275204.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Pointless for debugging and a major performance sink.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
"USING VLA'S IS ACTIVELY STUPID! It generates much more code, and much
slower code (and more fragile code), than just using a fixed key size
would have done." -- Linus Torvalds
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
We never use jemalloc without MOZ_MEMORY surrounding code (mostly a
FreeBSD concession which doesn't work anyway). This allows us to get rid
of the "poor man's mutex" (CPU-based spinlock) in mozjemalloc.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This basic validation is hard-set to always-on, so no point in keeping
it conditional since we basically always want this rudimentary pointer
validation to be done.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
gathered together.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1158445
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=963983
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542758
Solaris madvise and malign don't perfectly map to their POSIX counterparts, and some Linux versions (especially Android) don't define the POSIX counterparts at all, so options are limited. Ideally posix_madvise and posix_malign should be the safer and more portable options for all platforms.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Compared with what Pale Moon had for Solaris originally, this is mostly the same zero point I started patching from, but I've made the following changes here after reviewing all this initial code I never looked at closely before.
1. In package-manifest.in for both Basilisk and Pale Moon, I've made the SPARC code for libfreebl not interefere with the x86 code, use the proper build flags, and also updated it to allow a SPARC64 build which is more likely to be used than the 32-bit SPARC code we had there.
2. See Mozilla bug #832272 and the old rules.mk patch from around Firefox 30 in oracle/solaris-userland. I believe they screwed up NSINSTALL on Solaris when they were trying to streamline the NSS buildsystem, because they started having unexplained issues with it around that time after Firefox 22 that they never properly resolved until Mozilla began building NSS with gyp files. I'm actually not even sure how relevant the thing they broke actually is to Solaris at this point, bug 665509 is so old it predates Firefox itself and goes back to the Mozilla suite days. I believe $(INSTALL) -t was wrong, and they meant $(NSINSTALL) -t because that makes more sense and is closer to what was there originally. It's what they have for WINNT, and it's possible a fix more like that could serve for Solaris as well. Alternatively, we could get rid of all these half-broken Makefiles and start building NSS with gyp files like Mozilla did.
3. I've completely cut out support for the Sun compiler and taken into account the reality that everyone builds Firefox (and therefore its forks) with GCC now on Solaris. This alone helped clean up a lot of the uglier parts of the code.
4. I've updated all remaining SOLARIS build flags to the newer XP_SOLARIS, because the SOLARIS flag is no longer set when building Solaris.
5. I've confirmed the workaround in gtxFontconfigFonts.cpp is no longer necessary. The Solaris people got impatient about implementing a half-baked patch for a fontconfig feature that wasn't ready yet back in 2009, and somehow convinced Mozilla to patch their software to work around it when really they should have just fixed or removed their broken fontconfig patch. The feature they wanted has since been implemented properly, and no version of Solaris still uses the broken patch that required this fix. If anyone had ever properly audited this code, it would have been removed a long time ago.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
GCC 7+ warns about too many false positives.
|
| |
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 4ceb21241eacac2911f2fed846359215870f121f.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Tag #288
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Lock contention is not something we'd easily have to deal with in our application.
This simplifies our code.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
We assume our applications are always going to have multithreaded access to the malloc.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
