<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Andreas Raab <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andreas.raab@gmx.de">andreas.raab@gmx.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
Eliot Miranda wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So yes, when creating a new image, all objects are in oldSpace and so no objects need to be in the rot table or have their root bit set.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Correct.<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
This raises another point of ignorance for me. I would have thought that it is OK for the root bit to be set or the root table to contain objects that are not in old space or do not/no longer refer to objects in youngSpace because the GC will remove these from the root table on GC. But I don't see where objects get cleared from the rootTable. I only see the RootTable being voided when it gets full (rather drastic). Can anyone say if this happens or not, and if so, where it happens?<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I think you're right. Short of a full GC the root table may never get cleared.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think next week I'll instrument the VM and we should put it underneath a server image which we should run for some time ad then interrupt and print the occupancy of the root table. It could be that it is filling up with objects that are no loner roots and incremental collection is slowing down.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Cheers,<br><font color="#888888">
- Andreas<br>
<br>
</font><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="Ih2E3d">
Looks to me like either markAndTrace: or a specialized version, say markAndTraceRootObject:, should maintain a flag, refersToYoungObject, and clear the object from the rootTable (and clear the root bit) if refersToYoungObject is false at the end of the scan. But with the pointer reversal algorithm it is hard to see where to maintain this flag.<br>
<br>
Can those who know enlighten this ignorant soul?<br>
<br>
TIA<br>
<br></div><div class="Ih2E3d">
On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Igor Stasenko <<a href="mailto:siguctua@gmail.com" target="_blank">siguctua@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:siguctua@gmail.com" target="_blank">siguctua@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
i'd like to ask, is it safe to clear the root flag for every object<br>
in system.<br>
I'm artificially creating a new image, and i'd like to know, what<br>
objects should be marked as roots initially, or VM can care about it<br>
itself?<br>
<br>
--<br>
Best regards,<br>
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br>