Re[4]: [Gc] time for an alpha release?

Ivan Maidanski ivmai at mail.ru
Tue Dec 1 14:01:40 PST 2009


Hi!
"Boehm, Hans" <hans.boehm at hp.com> wrote:
> Sorry.  I think it would be a good idea to get an Alpha release out asap.  If you have time, please do so.  Otherwise I will do so when I get back.  We can fix test.c afterwards.
>
> By the current numbering scheme, this should be alpha4, and the tree should become alpha5 afterwards.

I sent the tarball to hans.boehm at hp.com (I also prepared a stand-alone tarball for AO v1.3a1 in case you might wish to update its home page)

I'll set CVS to alpha5 (and AO to 1.3a2) tomorrow.

BTW. I think it would be good for AO to have its version macro (defined in src/atomic_ops.h or in a dedicated header file) like that for GC in gc_version.h.

>
> Thanks.
>
> Hans
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > [mailto:gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com] On Behalf Of Ivan Maidanski
> > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 10:33 PM
> > To: gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > Subject: Re[2]: [Gc] time for an alpha release?
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Hans -
> >
> > It's unclear to me from your answer whether it would be good
> > if I prepare the alpha release tarball (right today) or it
> > would be good to wait for the entitled patch, or you prepare
> > the tarball yourself (when back to home).
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > The current parallel GC algorithm doesn't interact very
> > well with real incremental collection.  But I think the
> > collector already backs off to pure generational (collections
> > run to completion, but mark bits are not reset at every GC)
> > if you try to combine them.  In particular, the threads
> > initialization code sets GC_time_limit to GC_TIME_UNLIMITED
> > in the PARALLEL_MARK case..  Thus I don't think there's a
> > reason to prevent the combination in the test code.
> > >
> > > We could probably do better in allowing real incremental
> > and parallel collection to be combined.  There are some real
> > issues in that it takes a while to start up and shut down a
> > parallel collection.  But I'm sure we could do better than we are now.
> > >
> > > Hans
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Talbot, George [mailto:Gtalbot at ansarisbio.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 5:52 AM
> > > > To: Boehm, Hans; Ivan Maidanski; gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > > > Subject: RE: [Gc] time for an alpha release?
> > > >
> > > > Just out of curiosity--I'm on one of those platforms
> > > > (x86_64) that appears to disable incremental collection with
> > > > parallel mark turned on.  Why is that again?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > George T. Talbot
> > > > <gtalbot at locuspharma.com>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > > > > [mailto:gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com]
> > > > > On Behalf Of Boehm, Hans
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 1:35 AM
> > > > > To: Ivan Maidanski; gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > > > > Subject: RE: [Gc] time for an alpha release?
> > > > >
> > > > > That sounds like a good idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > I did get a little bit of time to look at the heap growth
> > > > issue a bit more.
> > > > > There is currently a minor problem in that test.c is
> > inconsistent
> > > > > about enabling incremental collection on different
> > platforms.  On
> > > > > some, parallel mark disables it, as do some other features.
> > > >  I have a
> > > > > patch to make this more consistent, and hopefully get
> > more similar
> > > > > heap size behavior, but that's not critical.  And I'm currently
> > > > > travelling again, so I'm not sure I'll get the patch in
> > > > that quickly.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hans
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > > > > > [mailto:gc-bounces at napali.hpl.hp.com] On Behalf Of Ivan
> > > > > > Maidanski
> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 10:46 PM
> > > > > > To: gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> > > > > > Subject: [Gc] time for an alpha release?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hans -
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The development activity has been very low over the
> > last month.
> > > > > > Why not to make an alpha release for GC now? (I could prepare
> > > > > > the tarball and update the CVS (including for libatomics)
> > > > > > accordingly.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I believe we could reach more test&report auditory (for
> > > > the recent
> > > > > > code changes) by releasing a tarball (instead of offering
> > > > everybody
> > > > > > to fetch the source from the CVS).

Bye.


More information about the Gc mailing list