ok,Thanks for your help.
2008/4/16, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Lyon, good question. :) > > You are right. They should be similar, and have the same function in > sspace. The gc_try_schedule_collection is for concurrent GC. You can > ignore it if you don't care about concurrent generational GC. It is > not in sspace because the generational concurrent GC is not finished > yet for sspace. > > Thanks, > xiaofeng > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:58 PM, lyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi all: > > I am reading the gc algorithm that are trace_forward and semi_space. > > > > I found that the function fspace_alloc(unsigned size, Allocator > > *allocator) is *similar* whih the function sspace_alloc(unsigned size, > > Allocator *allocator).But the fspace_alloc call the function > > gc_try_schedule_collection(allocator->gc, GC_CAUSE_NIL), sspace_alloc > do > > not. > > According to reading the src, * *I think that the *status* of the two > > allocation algorithms is equal. if fspace_alloc needs to call > > *gc_try_schedule_collection* ,then sspace_alloc should call the > > function.But the fact is not that. > > the function *gc_try_schedule_collection *is difficult to understand. I > > am confused.So the function > > of the *gc_try_schedule_collection *is what.why are the allocations > > different? > > thanks > > > > > > > > > -- > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com >
