harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fur...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm][gc] when will switch to GCV5 happen?
Date Fri, 04 May 2007 07:29:10 GMT
My opinion here is the sooner we get switched to GCv5, the sooner we get it
stable.
So, I'm +1 to switch to GCv5 this month.

On 5/3/07, Rana Dasgupta <rdasgupt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think that it should, as well. But maybe the priorities are not the
> same.
>
> My suggestion would be to integrate GCv5 as the default as soon as we
> can. It was switched out primarily because of the > 1.5 GB heap issue.
> This should help it stabilize by regular testing etc.
>
> The TM needs to work correctly and demonstrate elimitation of leaks
> etc. with the default GC first. I think that the fix then needs to be
> ported to 4.1, we want it to stay functional. A similar ( not quite
> the same ) case is the two jits we support.
>
> Thanks,
> Rana
>
>
>
> On 5/3/07, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Pavel Pervov wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The reason I ask is because I am working on threading memory leaks
> that
> > >> assume GCV5.
> > >
> > >
> > > How come? Shouldn't DRLVM's TM be GC independent?
> >
> > that's what I was wondering
> >
> >
> > Tim
> >
>



-- 
Mikhail Fursov

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message