RFR: 8253779: Amalloc may be wasting space by overaligning [v2]

Fri Jul 9 05:40:54 UTC 2021

On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 03:31:56 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I agree that Amalloc_4 is a bad name.  I thought of Amalloc_ptr but it's not good either.  Amalloc_naturally_aligned....  too long.
>
> Perhaps the naming ought to be Amalloc => AmallocL (long) and Amalloc4 => Amalloc?  But even if you agree with that or some other better naming scheme, such renaming probably ought to be a separate thing.

I agree. I feel like this should really be the default "Amalloc" (pointer-sized alignment) and Amalloc should really be specific, e.g. "Amalloc64".

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4732