From c2343180d74f547d99abcc3c4979a9ebb047af17 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James McCoy Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 18:09:52 -0500 Subject: Remove support for using jemalloc instead of the system allocator There was never any investigation done to determine whether using jemalloc was actually a net benefit for nvim. It has been a portability limitation and adds another factor to consider when triaging issues. --- src/coverity-model.c | 26 -------------------------- 1 file changed, 26 deletions(-) (limited to 'src/coverity-model.c') diff --git a/src/coverity-model.c b/src/coverity-model.c index 3c38e4ae4d..2fd55c332c 100644 --- a/src/coverity-model.c +++ b/src/coverity-model.c @@ -34,32 +34,6 @@ int uv_pipe_open(struct uv_pipe_s *handle, int fd) return result; } -// Issue 2422 -// -// Teach coverity about jemalloc functions, so that it understands -// they are equivalent to malloc ones. - -void *je_malloc(size_t size) -{ - return __coverity_alloc__(size); -} - -void je_free(void *ptr) -{ - __coverity_free__(ptr); -} - -void *je_calloc(size_t count, size_t size) -{ - return je_malloc(count * size); -} - -void *je_realloc(void *ptr, size_t size) -{ - je_free(ptr); - return je_malloc(size); -} - // Hint Coverity that adding item to d avoids losing track // of the memory allocated for item. typedef struct {} dictitem_T; -- cgit