From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8bfa8c460ead1701
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: ldb <ldb_nospam@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Problems with dynamic allocation in tasks
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:04:48 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1185383088.872717.223020@l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
References: <1185379864.592973.73220@b79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
   <wcczm1kfn4i.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.210.81.55
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1185383089 25170 127.0.0.1 (25 Jul 2007 17:04:49
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:04:49 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <wcczm1kfn4i.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.8.1.4) Gecko/20061201 Firefox/2.0.0.4
 (Ubuntu-feisty),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: l70g2000hse.googlegroups.com; posting-host=206.210.81.55;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:1175
Date: 2007-07-25T10:04:48-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jul 25, 12:45 pm, Robert A Duff <bobd...@shell01.TheWorld.com>
wrote:
> ldb <ldb_nos...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >...Ideally, i'd be able to
> > create a task-local memory pool that doesn't require a mutex for these
> > allocations.. not sure how feasible this is in Ada, though.
>
> It's quite feasible.  Look up storage pools (section 13.11 in the RM).
>
> - Bob

I'm at a loss for how this possible using storage pools.

I've worked a good deal with storage pools but perhaps my vision of
their functionality is too narrow. It was my belief that a storage
pool can only be used globally for a particular type. These dynamic
allocations are done with global types, ie, Access_Vector. Certainly a
storage pool can be attached to Access_Vector and intercept, figure
out which thread its in.. but then what? In a "simple" implementation,
I'm still depending on System.Memory (which is malloc()) and it's
still gonna hit these mutexes.

I -could- make the storage-pool implement a full allocator so it's not
dependant on malloc() for each allocation. This is alot of work and
there are alot of types. If I go this route, I'd prefer to do a global
replace (which goes back to my original question of how to do it like
gmem does it).