gh-126868: Add freelist for compact int objects #126865
+102
−55
Fixup
- Loading branch information
commit d1e4aa268ed83dfcb35b18b040451a75bd003bee
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -3620,13 +3620,11 @@ long_richcompare(PyObject *self, PyObject *other, int op) | |
| void | ||
| _PyLong_ExactDealloc(PyObject *self) | ||
| { | ||
| if (_PyLong_IsCompact((PyLongObject *)self)) { | ||
| _Py_FREELIST_FREE(ints, self, PyObject_Free); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| PyObject_Free(self); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| static void | ||
|
|
@@ -3650,6 +3648,14 @@ long_dealloc(PyObject *self) | |
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (PyLong_CheckExact(self)) { | ||
| if (_PyLong_IsCompact((PyLongObject *)self)) { | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. @Fidget-Spinner The Also, can we remove the |
||
| _Py_FREELIST_FREE(ints, self, PyObject_Free); | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| Py_TYPE(self)->tp_free(self); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just realised that we didnt check for if it's a smallint cached value here. It should be rejected there
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nevermind. It's not needed because (theoretically) the refcount of a smallint never hits 0 due to it being immortal, so this code will never be called on it. Can you add an assert to be safe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This also means my comment about the small ints was wrong. Could you remove that please?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The comment has been adapted. If the refcount can never become zero, then the code in
long_deallocchecking for small ints can be removed (perhaps also with an assert). Since this is something unrelated to the freelists I will make a separate PR for that and rebase this one.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Fidget-Spinner I think your first remark was right after all and we do need to check for smallints (at least in the 32-bit stable ABI build). I will add the check once there is consensus on #127120 (which might very well be the status quo)