The mempool allocator implementation recursively breaks a memory block
into 4 sub-blocks until it minimally fits the requested memory size.
The size of each sub-blocks is rounded up to the next word boundary to
preserve word alignment on the returned memory, and this is a problem.
Let's consider max_sz = 2072 and n_max = 1. That's our level 0.
At level 1, we get one level-0 block split in 4 sub-blocks whose size
is WB_UP(2072 / 4) = 520. However 4 * 520 = 2080 so we must discard the
4th sub-block since it doesn't fit inside our 2072-byte parent block.
We're down to 3 * 520 = 1560 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 1560 / 2072 = 75%.
At level 2, we get 3 level-1 blocks, and each of them may be split
in 4 sub-blocks whose size is WB_UP(520 / 4) = 132. But 4 * 132 = 528
so the 4th sub-block has to be discarded again.
We're down to 9 * 132 = 1188 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 1188 / 2072 = 57%.
At level 3, we get 9 level-2 blocks, each split into WB_UP(132 / 4)
= 36 bytes. Again 4 * 36 = 144 so the 4th sub-block is discarded.
We're down to 27 * 36 = 972 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 972 / 2072 = 47%.
What should be done instead, is to round _down_ sub-block sizes
not _up_. This way, sub-blocks still align to word boundaries, and
they always fit within their parent block as the total size may
no longer exceed the initial size.
Using the same max_sz = 2072 would yield a memory usage efficiency of
99% at level 3, so let's demo a worst case 2044 instead.
Level 1: 4 sub-blocks of WB_DN(2044 / 4) = 508 bytes.
We're down to 4 * 508 = 2032 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 2032 / 2044 = 99%.
Level 2: 4 * 4 sub-blocks of WB_DN(508 / 4) = 124 bytes.
We're down to 16 * 124 = 1984 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 1984 / 2044 = 97%.
Level 3: 16 * 4 sub-blocks of WB_DN(124 / 4) = 28 bytes.
We're down to 64 * 28 = 1792 bytes of usable memory.
Our memory usage efficiency is now 1792 / 2044 = 88%.
Conclusion: if max_sz is a power of 2 then we get 100% efficiency at
all levens in both cases. But if not, then the rounding-up method has
a far worse degradation curve than the rounding-down method, wasting
more than 50% of memory in some cases.
So let's round sub-block sizes down rather than up, and remove
block_fits() which purpose was to identify sub-blocks that didn't
fit within their parent block and is now useless.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <npitre@baylibre.com>
629bd85612