This is not the same. In your example, if the second reference points to previous position of object it will be automatically updated according to installed forwarding pointer.
We have different problem. The reported offset within object is incorrect, as the base is taken from new location of object, but interior pointer points to old object location. Here is algorithm. before GC: *interior_pointer == base + offset after GC: *interior_pointer_updated == new_base + offset Reported offset should be: offset = *interior_pointer - base; But we have: offset' = *interior_pointer - new_base; After GC interior_pointer should be updated: *interior_pointer_updated = new_base + offset But in our case it will be: *interiour_pointer_updated' = new_base + offset' = new_base + *interior_pointer - new_base = *interior_pointer So, interior_pointer will not be updated. -- Ivan On 10/6/06, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ivan, the problem is described in the example in H1682, I can add it to the email thread to invite other GC/JIT gurus to participate in the discussion. The example: JIT has 2 references to report. Both of them point to the same object. JIT expects that both references are updated when GC moves object. 1) JIT reports reference 1 2) GC moves object and updates reference 1. 3) JIT reports reference 2, but the reference points to the old place where the object was. This is almost the same situation we have today. On 10/6/06, Ivan Volosyuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why don't we update roots just when it was reported? Thus we don't need to > keep large array of roots and it can also have positive influence on > d-cache utilization (need to proof this). > -- Mikhail Fursov
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
