Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(200)

Side by Side Diff: third_party/tcmalloc/vendor/NEWS

Issue 9701040: Revert 126715 - Update the tcmalloc vendor branch to r144 (gperftools 2.0). (Closed) Base URL: svn://svn.chromium.org/chrome/trunk/src/
Patch Set: Created 8 years, 9 months ago
Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.
Jump to:
View unified diff | Download patch | Annotate | Revision Log
« no previous file with comments | « third_party/tcmalloc/vendor/Makefile.in ('k') | third_party/tcmalloc/vendor/README » ('j') | no next file with comments »
Toggle Intra-line Diffs ('i') | Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Show Comments Hide Comments ('s')
OLDNEW
1 == 03 February 2012 == 1 == 15 July 2011 ==
2 2
3 I've just released gperftools 2.0
4
5 The `google-perftools` project has been renamed to `gperftools`. I
6 (csilvers) am stepping down as maintainer, to be replaced by
7 David Chappelle. Welcome to the team, David! David has been an
8 an active contributor to perftools in the past -- in fact, he's the
9 only person other than me that already has commit status. I am
10 pleased to have him take over as maintainer.
11
12 I have both renamed the project (the Google Code site renamed a few
13 weeks ago), and bumped the major version number up to 2, to reflect
14 the new community ownership of the project. Almost all the
15 [http://gperftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/gperftools-2.0/ChangeLog changes]
16 are related to the renaming.
17
18 The main functional change from google-perftools 1.10 is that
19 I've renamed the `google/` include-directory to be `gperftools/`
20 instead. New code should `#include <gperftools/tcmalloc.h>`/etc.
21 (Most users of perftools don't need any perftools-specific includes at
22 all, so this is mostly directed to "power users.") I've kept the old
23 names around as forwarding headers to the new, so `#include
24 <google/tcmalloc.h>` will continue to work.
25
26 (The other functional change which I snuck in is getting rid of some
27 bash-isms in one of the unittest driver scripts, so it could run on
28 Solaris.)
29
30 Note that some internal names still contain the text `google`, such as
31 the `google_malloc` internal linker section. I think that's a
32 trickier transition, and can happen in a future release (if at all).
33
34
35 === 31 January 2012 ===
36
37 I've just released perftools 1.10
38
39 There is an API-incompatible change: several of the methods in the
40 `MallocExtension` class have changed from taking a `void*` to taking a
41 `const void*`. You should not be affected by this API change
42 unless you've written your own custom malloc extension that derives
43 from `MallocExtension`, but since it is a user-visible change, I have
44 upped the `.so` version number for this release.
45
46 This release focuses on improvements to linux-syscall-support.h,
47 including ARM and PPC fixups and general cleanups. I hope this will
48 magically fix an array of bugs people have been seeing.
49
50 There is also exciting news on the porting front, with support for
51 patching win64 assembly contributed by IBM Canada! This is an
52 important step -- perhaps the most difficult -- to getting perftools
53 to work on 64-bit windows using the patching technique (it doesn't
54 affect the libc-modification technique). `premable_patcher_test` has
55 been added to help test these changes; it is meant to compile under
56 x86_64, and won't work under win32.
57
58 For the full list of changes, including improved `HEAP_PROFILE_MMAP`
59 support, see the
60 [http://gperftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/google-perftools-1.10/ChangeLog Chang eLog].
61
62
63 === 24 January 2011 ===
64
65 The `google-perftools` Google Code page has been renamed to
66 `gperftools`, in preparation for the project being renamed to
67 `gperftools`. In the coming weeks, I'll be stepping down as
68 maintainer for the perftools project, and as part of that Google is
69 relinquishing ownership of the project; it will now be entirely
70 community run. The name change reflects that shift. The 'g' in
71 'gperftools' stands for 'great'. :-)
72
73 === 23 December 2011 ===
74
75 I've just released perftools 1.9.1
76
77 I missed including a file in the tarball, that is needed to compile on
78 ARM. If you are not compiling on ARM, or have successfully compiled
79 perftools 1.9, there is no need to upgrade.
80
81
82 === 22 December 2011 ===
83
84 I've just released perftools 1.9
85
86 This change has a slew of improvements, from better ARM and freebsd
87 support, to improved performance by moving some code outside of locks,
88 to better pprof reporting of code with overloaded functions.
89
90 The full list of changes is in the
91 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/google-perftools-1.9/ChangeLog ChangeLog].
92
93
94 === 26 August 2011 ===
95
96 I've just released perftools 1.8.3
97
98 The star-crossed 1.8 series continues; in 1.8.1, I had accidentally
99 removed some code that was needed for FreeBSD. (Without this code
100 many apps would crash at startup.) This release re-adds that code.
101 If you are not on FreeBSD, or are using FreeBSD with perftools 1.8 or
102 earlier, there is no need to upgrade.
103
104 === 11 August 2011 ===
105
106 I've just released perftools 1.8.2
107
108 I was incorrectly calculating the patch-level in the configuration
109 step, meaning the TC_VERSION_PATCH #define in tcmalloc.h was wrong.
110 Since the testing framework checks for this, it was failing. Now it
111 should work again. This time, I was careful to re-run my tests after
112 upping the version number. :-)
113
114 If you don't care about the TC_VERSION_PATCH #define, there's no
115 reason to upgrae.
116
117 === 26 July 2011 ===
118
119 I've just released perftools 1.8.1
120
121 I was missing an #include that caused the build to break under some
122 compilers, especially newer gcc's, that wanted it. This only affects
123 people who build from source, so only the .tar.gz file is updated from
124 perftools 1.8. If you didn't have any problems compiling perftools
125 1.8, there's no reason to upgrade.
126
127 === 15 July 2011 ===
128
129 I've just released perftools 1.8 3 I've just released perftools 1.8
130 4
131 Of the many changes in this release, a good number pertain to porting. 5 Of the many changes in this release, a good number pertain to porting.
132 I've revamped OS X support to use the malloc-zone framework; it should 6 I've revamped OS X support to use the malloc-zone framework; it should
133 now Just Work to link in tcmalloc, without needing 7 now Just Work to link in tcmalloc, without needing
134 `DYLD_FORCE_FLAT_NAMESPACE` or the like. (This is a pretty major 8 `DYLD_FORCE_FLAT_NAMESPACE` or the like. (This is a pretty major
135 change, so please feel free to report feedback at 9 change, so please feel free to report feedback at
136 google-perftools@googlegroups.com.) 64-bit Windows support is also 10 google-perftools@googlegroups.com.) 64-bit Windows support is also
137 improved, as is ARM support, and the hooks are in place to improve 11 improved, as is ARM support, and the hooks are in place to improve
138 FreeBSD support as well. 12 FreeBSD support as well.
139 13
140 On the other hand, I'm seeing hanging tests on Cygwin. I see the same 14 On the other hand, I'm seeing hanging tests on Cygwin. I see the same
141 hanging even with (the old) perftools 1.7, so I'm guessing this is 15 hanging even with (the old) perftools 1.7, so I'm guessing this is
142 either a problem specific to my Cygwin installation, or nobody is 16 either a problem specific to my Cygwin installation, or nobody is
143 trying to use perftools under Cygwin. If you can reproduce the 17 trying to use perftools under Cygwin. If you can reproduce the
144 problem, and even better have a solution, you can report it at 18 problem, and even better have a solution, you can report it at
145 google-perftools@googlegroups.com. 19 google-perftools@googlegroups.com.
146 20
147 Internal changes include several performance and space-saving tweaks. 21 Internal changes include several performance and space-saving tweaks.
148 One is user-visible (but in "stealth mode", and otherwise 22 One is user-visible (but in "stealth mode", and otherwise
149 undocumented): you can compile with `-DTCMALLOC_SMALL_BUT_SLOW`. In 23 undocumented): you can compile with `-DTCMALLOC_SMALL_BUT_SLOW`. In
150 this mode, tcmalloc will use less memory overhead, at the cost of 24 this mode, tcmalloc will use less memory overhead, at the cost of
151 running (likely not noticeably) slower. 25 running (likely not noticeably) slower.
152 26
153 There are many other changes as well, too numerous to recount here, 27 There are many other changes as well, too numerous to recount here,
154 but present in the 28 but present in the
155 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/google-perftools-1.8/ChangeLog ChangeLog]. 29 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/perftools-1.8/ChangeLog ChangeL og].
156 30
157 31
158 === 7 February 2011 === 32 === 7 February 2011 ===
159 33
160 Thanks to endlessr..., who 34 Thanks to endlessr..., who
161 [http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/detail?id=307 identified] 35 [http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/detail?id=307 identified]
162 why some tests were failing under MSVC 10 in release mode. It does not look 36 why some tests were failing under MSVC 10 in release mode. It does not look
163 like these failures point toward any problem with tcmalloc itself; rather, the 37 like these failures point toward any problem with tcmalloc itself; rather, the
164 problem is with the test, which made some assumptions that broke under the 38 problem is with the test, which made some assumptions that broke under the
165 some aggressive optimizations used in MSVC 10. I'll fix the test, but in 39 some aggressive optimizations used in MSVC 10. I'll fix the test, but in
166 the meantime, feel free to use perftools even when compiled under MSVC 40 the meantime, feel free to use perftools even when compiled under MSVC
167 10. 41 10.
168 42
169 === 4 February 2011 === 43 === 4 February 2011 ===
170 44
171 I've just released perftools 1.7 45 I've just released perftools 1.7
172 46
173 I apologize for the delay since the last release; so many great new 47 I apologize for the delay since the last release; so many great new
174 patches and bugfixes kept coming in (and are still coming in; I also 48 patches and bugfixes kept coming in (and are still coming in; I also
175 apologize to those folks who have to slip until the next release). I 49 apologize to those folks who have to slip until the next release). I
176 picked this arbitrary time to make a cut. 50 picked this arbitrary time to make a cut.
177 51
178 Among the many new features in this release is a multi-megabyte 52 Among the many new features in this release is a multi-megabyte
179 reduction in the amount of tcmalloc overhead uder x86_64, improved 53 reduction in the amount of tcmalloc overhead uder x86_64, improved
180 performance in the case of contention, and many many bugfixes, 54 performance in the case of contention, and many many bugfixes,
181 especially architecture-specific bugfixes. See the 55 especially architecture-specific bugfixes. See the
182 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/google-perftools-1.7/ChangeLog ChangeLog] 56 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/perftools-1.7/ChangeLog ChangeL og]
183 for full details. 57 for full details.
184 58
185 One architecture-specific change of note is added comments in the 59 One architecture-specific change of note is added comments in the
186 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/perftools-1.7/README README] 60 [http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn/tags/perftools-1.7/README README]
187 for using tcmalloc under OS X. I'm trying to get my head around the 61 for using tcmalloc under OS X. I'm trying to get my head around the
188 exact behavior of the OS X linker, and hope to have more improvements 62 exact behavior of the OS X linker, and hope to have more improvements
189 for the next release, but I hope these notes help folks who have been 63 for the next release, but I hope these notes help folks who have been
190 having trouble with tcmalloc on OS X. 64 having trouble with tcmalloc on OS X.
191 65
192 *Windows users*: I've heard reports that some unittests fail on 66 *Windows users*: I've heard reports that some unittests fail on
(...skipping 136 matching lines...) Expand 10 before | Expand all | Expand 10 after
329 has shown that profiles are unreliable in that case. The problem has 203 has shown that profiles are unreliable in that case. The problem has
330 existed since the first release of perftools. We expect to have a fix 204 existed since the first release of perftools. We expect to have a fix
331 for perftools 1.2. For more details, see 205 for perftools 1.2. For more details, see
332 [http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/detail?id=105 issue 105]. 206 [http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/detail?id=105 issue 105].
333 207
334 Everyone who uses perftools 1.0 is encouraged to upgrade to perftools 208 Everyone who uses perftools 1.0 is encouraged to upgrade to perftools
335 1.1. If you see any problems with the new release, please file a bug 209 1.1. If you see any problems with the new release, please file a bug
336 report at http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/list. 210 report at http://code.google.com/p/google-perftools/issues/list.
337 211
338 Enjoy! 212 Enjoy!
OLDNEW
« no previous file with comments | « third_party/tcmalloc/vendor/Makefile.in ('k') | third_party/tcmalloc/vendor/README » ('j') | no next file with comments »

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698