[Gc] Re[3]: [bdwgc] Add disclaim callback and a "finalized" object kind (#5)

Ivan Maidanski ivmai at mail.ru
Wed Jan 25 05:22:01 PST 2012


Hi Petter,

Is "cd" passed to GC_register_disclaim_proc assumed to be GC-visible? If yes then GC_push_all should be invoke for every GC_obj_kinds[i].ok_disclaim_cd. If no, there should be a note in the comment.

Regards.

17 01 2012, 20:27 Ivan Maidanski <ivmai at mail.ru>:
> Regarding pull requests vs merge manually: seems it doesn't matter for me as I see your commits on Network -> Fork Queue panel (allowing me to apply it into some branch).
> 
> 13 01 2012, 22:45 Petter Urkedal <reply+i-1676083-23a7200ee85ed491d4b78d17b755365da52f4e23-460469 at reply.github.com>:
> > On 2012-01-13, Ivan Maidanski wrote:
> > > Hi Petter,
> > >
> > > On an occasion, I've launched disclaim_test.c  without -DALL_INTERIOR_POINTERS (for both GC and test) and it failed. I haven't analyzed the reason, right now my question is: Does finalized_malloc feature require ALL_INTERIOR_POINTERS (in this case, please add conditional #error), or just the test require it (then please add GC_set_all_interior_pointers call).
> > >
> > > Cmd (that i've launched, I haven't tried it using make):
> > > gcc -I include -DENABLE_DISCLAIM --include extra/gc.c tests/disclaim_test.c
> >
> > Hi Ivan,
> >
> > Yes, the finalized object allocated displaces the returned pointer by
> > one word, to hide the finalizer stored in the first word.  I just sent a
> > pull request.
> >
> > BTW, do you prefer to merge manually or do you like the pull request
> > feature?  (I don't have experience on your end of it.)
> >
> > Petter
> >
> > ---
> > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> > https://github.com/ivmai/bdwgc/pull/5#issuecomment-3484265
> > 



More information about the Gc mailing list