Andi Gutmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't like this patch because already the gc is a very sensitive
> mechanism and we're not allowed to collect too much or too little at any
> given time. Your patch can easily lead to too much being collected before
> previous zval's are freed which can lead to problems (this mechanism was
> refined a couple of times due to such problems).
> The only real solution I can see is to nuke the garbage completely. I
> already have a rough idea of how to do it but it requires quite a lot of work.
> BTW, I didn't quite understand the bug report 25543. It doesn't seem to be
> very well written (I know it's not you :)
Actually the PR number is 25547 :) Anyway, I don't think my patch is so harmful because the pointer to a zval (semantically a container of a zval instance) that has been created at certain znode construction is supposed not to be destroyed during an atomic operation, by which I mean a single opcode processing. That's why I named them zend_*_atomic().
OK, that explains why the bug report didn't seem to have anything to do with this problem :)
I disagree. It definitely has potential to be harmful because the garbage isn't running every opcode like it should. At least that's what I figured from reading the patch.
Andi
-- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
