On 8/24/06, Salikh Zakirov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In any way, currently there is no single header file in the system, which would describe the object structure. Rather, DRLVM uses some static assumptions about object header, which are not enforced by any common include file. This would be a nice thing to solve...
Good point. There needs to be a discussion on harmony-dev regarding how the object header bits are "sliced and diced". From talking to the MMTk guys (Steve Blackburn) it seems MMTk wants to have one byte of object header for private use. Its unclear to me if this will be a performance problem for a product JVM. I think the hashCode can be reduced to one bit plus the object's current address at first HashCode() invocation. I'd put this hash bit in the GC byte. And make the GC byte the lowest byte in the header word. The remaining 3bytes could be used for fat/thin locks. Are there any remaining fields unaccounted for? Thoughts? -- Weldon Washburn Intel Middleware Products Division --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
