[Gc] Re: Handling segfaults that are not due to the GC's write barrier

Henning Makholm Henning at octoshape.com
Mon Apr 7 12:55:20 PDT 2008


Hans Boehm writes:

> Would it not make sense to just rely on GWW_VDB instead of
> MPROTECT_VDB for incremental collection?  I think
> GetWriteWatch has now been supported for long enough that we
> can generally rely on it.  I haven't tied it, but I suspect
> it dodges all these issues, and then some ...

Yes, that would make sense (though I would have to upgrade to
7.0, right?). Generally I'm supposed to support unpatched
Windows 2000, which does not have GWW, but I think it would be
acceptable to be non-incremental on such ancient systems.

I can see that the code tries to load GetWriteWatch at run time,
which is good. I assume that version 7.x will gracefully fall
back to stop-the-world if I just patch gcconfig.h to not define
MPROTECT_VDB?

--
Henning Makholm
OctoShape ApS



More information about the Gc mailing list