On 07/15/14 07:00, Matthew Flatt wrote:
The "gc" directory is Boehm's GC. We've modified it a little (grep for
"PLTSCHEME"), but we try not to maintain the GC itself, except to
upgrade every once in a while.
Sorry, I should to look the code before of to ask :) . I thought the
boehm gc version included with racket was pretty modified. My bad.
See
http://www.hboehm.info/gc/
for the latest version, the mailing list, etc.
I should look again at making Racket work with a stock build of Boehm's
GC, so we can get out of the business of upgrading and modifying it. So
far, it has been easier to upgrade occasionally than to sort that out.
It is a great idea!. Boehm GC on OpenBSD is maintained by competent
programmers and they can deal better with bugs than me.
Meanwhile, Racket includes a slower and more portable "SGC" for
building the conservative-GC variant of Racket. You can enable it with
`--enable-sgc` as a flag to `configure`. Probably we should switch to
SGC as the default, since RacketCGC is now mainly used just to build
normal Racket.
I've not enabled Senora by default because I tried to build racket on
hppa and I had the same problem than with boehm. I've asked to another
OpenBSD dev to test Racket with Senora on mips64el.
At Tue, 15 Jul 2014 04:37:45 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
I've been reading the code of the files gc/os_dep.c and
gc/include/private/gcconfig.h. I've some questions related to OpenBSD.
---
In the X86_64 config, the file defines STACKBOTTOM and HEURISTIC2
(unused because racket picks STACKBOTTOM). What's the preferred?. I'm
asking because I don't know if the adding of HEURISTIC2 was an error or
really there a good reason to select one or other.
---
There is some recommended benchmark to test the performance of MMAP vs
sbrk? I've tried both with generic code and I don't see the difference.
---
OpenBSD only supports MIPS64. Should I add ELFCLASS64 to the MIPS block
within gcconfig.h?
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
