Re[4]: [Gc] Re: Win32 hang with MPROTECT_VDB

Ivan Maidanski ivmai at
Fri May 22 12:53:27 PDT 2009


"Boehm, Hans" <hans.boehm at> wrote:
> Thanks.
> I fixed the ChangeLog.  I didn't fix the check-in message, mostly because it would involve my figuring out how to do so.
> Your patch generally looks fine, but I'll try to check in some earlier patches first.  I suspect this wouldn't apply as is since the line numbers are way off.

Yes. The most early should go first. And the patches from other submitters (like that dealing with should, I think, take precedence if possible (just not to create multiple queues)...

> The answer to question 3 is no, so that part is OK as is.  In fact, for a normal X86 configuration, I believe pointer-free blocks should not be protected either, so an alternate patch might have been to make the thread descriptors pointer-free and to explicitly trace them.  But that depends on page and hblk sizes being the same, which makes it a bit brittle, so I decided to go with this approach instead.

Another Qs:
1. Is PARALLEL_MARK really (hard to be) incompatible with MPROTECT or this is just of little investigation?
2. Are You going to make MPROTECT the default one on Win32 (instead of GWW)?

> Hans
> > -----Original Message-----

More information about the Gc mailing list