[lkml]   [2002]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [ANNOUNCE] Native POSIX Thread Library 0.1
    On 22 Sep 2002, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

    > I fail to see why:
    > /* This is a safe point ... */
    > if (needs to be suspended) {
    > save_all_registers_on_the_stack()
    > flag_gc_thread()
    > wait_until_gc_thread_has_what_it_needs()
    > }
    > Needs kernel support.

    given that the existing code uses self-modifying-code for the safe-points
    i'm guessing there are so many safe-points that the above if statement
    would be excessive overhead (and the save/flag/wait stuff would probably
    cause a huge amount of code bloat -- but could probably be a subroutine).

    there was some really interesting GC work i heard about years ago where
    the compiler generated GC code along-side the normal executable code.
    the GC code understood the structure of the function and could make much
    better choices of GC targets than a generic routine could. when GC needs
    to occur, a walk up the stack in each thread executing the
    routine-specific GC stubs would be performed. (given just the stack
    frames you can index into a lookup table for the GC stubs... so there's no
    overhead when GC isn't occuring.) i don't have a reference handy though.

    anyhow, this is probably getting off-topic :)


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.021 / U:8.556 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site