Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors

Marco van de Voort <marcov@stack.nl>
Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:54:21 +0000 (UTC)

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors rand.chars@gmail.com (Ori Bernstein) (2008-09-09)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2008-09-13)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2008-09-14)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors niktechc@niktech.com (Sandeep Dutta) (2008-09-15)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors rand.chars@gmail.com (Ori Bernstein) (2008-09-15)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors rand.chars@gmail.com (Ori Bernstein) (2008-09-15)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2008-09-16)
Re: Register Allocators and Garbage Collectors rand.chars@gmail.com (Ori Bernstein) (2008-09-17)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Marco van de Voort <marcov@stack.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:54:21 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Stack Usenet News Service
References: 08-09-052
Keywords: GC
Posted-Date: 14 Sep 2008 16:59:24 EDT

On 2008-09-10, Ori Bernstein <rand.chars@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If we get a context switch between lines 2 and 3, then the only record
> of a root pointing to the newly allocated value is in register %eax,
> and is hidden from the debugger thread.
>
> How do garbage collectors deal with this problem typically? Does the
> compiler have to insert spill points which force the values onto the
> stack and invoke the GC? Am I just on crack thinking that there might
> be a problem?


I'm no GC expert, but I'd say that you detect roots to weed out certain
generation of blocks that can be cleaned.


So the solution is simple, don't add the "active" generation of blocks to
the generations to be cleaned.



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.