Add a memory reporter for the nsAtomTable

RESOLVED FIXED in mozilla12

Status

()

defect
RESOLVED FIXED
8 years ago
8 years ago

People

(Reporter: njn, Assigned: njn)

Tracking

unspecified
mozilla12
Points:
---

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

(Whiteboard: [MemShrink])

Attachments

(3 attachments)

Assignee

Description

8 years ago
DMD says it's reasonable prominent:

 Unreported: 1 block(s) in record 9 of 17967
  262,144 bytes (262,144 requested / 0 slop) 
  0.25% of the heap (7.19% cumulative unreported)
    at 0x402A063: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:263)
    by 0x403C0A4: moz_malloc (mozalloc.cpp:113)
    by 0x7A4126C: PL_DHashAllocTable (pldhash.cpp:114)
    by 0x7A41AAB: ChangeTable(PLDHashTable*, int) (pldhash.cpp:564)
    by 0x7A41D26: PL_DHashTableOperate (pldhash.cpp:649)
    by 0x7A565D9: GetAtomHashEntry(unsigned short const*, unsigned int) (nsAtomT
able.cpp:403)
    by 0x7A56A0F: NS_NewAtom(nsAString_internal const&) (nsAtomTable.cpp:534)
    by 0x68B4D95: do_GetAtom(nsAString_internal const&) (nsIAtom.h:199)

That's just the hash table storage, which I'm sure can get substantially bigger with more browsing.  There's also the AtomImpls pointed to by the hash table entries, and then the strings hanging off the AtomImpls, but I'll need to look more closely to see if they actually belong to the AtomImpls.
Assignee

Comment 1

8 years ago
Posted patch patch 1Splinter Review
This patch just adds nsStringBuffer::SizeOfIncludingThisIfUnshared(), which the next patch will use.
Attachment #583974 - Flags: review?(khuey)
Assignee

Comment 2

8 years ago
Posted patch patch 2Splinter Review
This adds the "explicit/atom-table" memory reporter.  With Gmail and
TechCrunch open it's just over 1MB worth.

I created EnsureTableExists() for an earlier version where I registered the
memory reporter in nsAtomTable.cpp.  That ended up having to change, but I
left EnsureTableExists() in because I think it's an improvement.
Attachment #583975 - Flags: review?(khuey)
Assignee

Comment 3

8 years ago
Posted patch patch 3Splinter Review
This patch moves AtomImpl and PermanentAtomImpl out of the header, because they don't need to be there.
Attachment #583977 - Flags: review?(khuey)
Comment on attachment 583977 [details] [diff] [review]
patch 3

Review of attachment 583977 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Why do we want this?
Comment on attachment 583977 [details] [diff] [review]
patch 3

Review of attachment 583977 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I guess hiding these is fine.
Attachment #583977 - Flags: review?(khuey) → review+
Assignee

Comment 6

8 years ago
> Why do we want this?

Basic information hiding, that's all.  I just figured I'd fix it while I was in the area.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.