[Gc] test.c patch

Boehm, Hans hans.boehm at hp.com
Thu Dec 10 16:13:22 PST 2009


I committed the patch.

I agree that NO_INCREMENTAL is redundant.  The GC_DISABLE_INCREMENTAL environment variable is a better solution.  I'm all in favor of removing it after 7.2 is out.

NO_INCREMENTAL existed in 7.1.  Thus I don't think there's a benefit to getting rid
of it before 7.2.  It was always a debugging option.  And it made a bit of sense
before GC_DISABLE_INCREMENTAL, and possibly before the pseudo-environment-file
support you recently added, but no more.

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: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 11:22 PM
> To: gc at napali.hpl.hp.com
> Subject: Re: [Gc] test.c patch
> 
> Hi!
> "Boehm, Hans" <hans.boehm at hp.com> wrote:
> > Unless someone can think of a reason not to, I'll shortly 
> check in the attached patch:
> >
> > 	* test.c (main, WinMain): Consistently don't invoke 
> GC_enable_incremental
> > 	if MAKE_BACK_GRAPH is defined, but do invoke it with 
> parallel marking.
> >
> > This should remove some of the unexpected platform 
> differences in heap size..
> >
> > Hans
> > ATTACHMENT: application/octet-stream (test.c.diff)
> 
> 1. I don't mind.
> 2. I think NO_INCREMENTAL should be removed completely 
> because the macro means something like "build the collector 
> with the incremental support but skip testing it (because 
> it's probably broken)".
> 
> Bye.
> _______________________________________________
> Gc mailing list
> Gc at linux.hpl.hp.com
> http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/gc/
> 


More information about the Gc mailing list