From 5e37a0ed5dfa5334d0dc67e170745ffbb6338f59 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philipp Oppermann Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 15:19:00 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Mention alternative names for bump/linked list allocator design --- .../second-edition/posts/11-allocator-designs/index.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/blog/content/second-edition/posts/11-allocator-designs/index.md b/blog/content/second-edition/posts/11-allocator-designs/index.md index f95caca6..9edc535e 100644 --- a/blog/content/second-edition/posts/11-allocator-designs/index.md +++ b/blog/content/second-edition/posts/11-allocator-designs/index.md @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ In the following we present three possible kernel allocator designs and explain ## Bump Allocator -The most simple allocator design is a _bump allocator_. It allocates memory linearly and only keeps track of the number of allocated bytes and the number of allocations. It is only useful in very specific use cases because it has a severe limitation: it can only free all memory at once. +The most simple allocator design is a _bump allocator_ (also known as _stack allocator_). It allocates memory linearly and only keeps track of the number of allocated bytes and the number of allocations. It is only useful in very specific use cases because it has a severe limitation: it can only free all memory at once. ### Idea @@ -465,7 +465,7 @@ Each list node contains two fields: The size of the memory region and a pointer [_free list_]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_list -As you might guess from the name, this is the technique that the `linked_list_allocator` crate uses. +As you might guess from the name, this is the technique that the `linked_list_allocator` crate uses. Allocators that use this technique are also often called _pool allocators_. ### Implementation