Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CP013: Missing a memory context if there are separate memory resources? #53

Open
Ruyk opened this issue May 4, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Comments

@Ruyk
Copy link
Contributor

Ruyk commented May 4, 2018

I wonder if we need a memory_context similar to the execution_context that has the allocation capabilities, e.g, you retrieve an allocator that is bound to the memory resource.
This allows implementation to add the machinery required to allocate or to bind allocation on the memory_context itself.

@Ruyk Ruyk changed the title Missing a memory context if there are separate memory resources? CP013: Missing a memory context if there are separate memory resources? May 4, 2018
@Ruyk Ruyk added the RAP18 Rapperswil 2018 C++ Meeting label May 4, 2018
@Ruyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ruyk commented May 5, 2018

Related to #49

@AerialMantis
Copy link
Contributor

Yes you're right, I think we will since we are separating the execution and memory topologies there will now be no object which you can construct from a memory resource in the same way we do for execution resources. Though perhaps this type can be an allocator directly, so in the same way pmr memory resources can be passed into a pmr allocator we could have a memory resource type which derives from the pmr memory resource and is then passed into a concrete affinity aware allocator type such as resource_allocator. This type could have additional mechanism for performing affinity aware allocations such as first-touch if they are supported, which call down to the memory resource for how to allocate memory on the specific resource.

@Ruyk Ruyk added enhancement and removed RAP18 Rapperswil 2018 C++ Meeting labels May 6, 2018
@Ruyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ruyk commented May 6, 2018

I am removing the RAP18 label since this is something we can address after the meeting

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants