Comment #5 on issue 3918 by [email protected]:
JitCodeEvent::CODE_REMOVED is the wrong thing
https://code.google.com/p/v8/issues/detail?id=3918
Hmm, I am not sure how often and in which cases a JitCodeEventHandler is
actually installed via the API. One could argue that taking the O(n) hit if
handlers are present is acceptable if the sweeper still is O(1)'ish in the
common case. But that depends on the use-cases of that API, and don't know
enough about those use-cases.
Not sure about the CODE_REMOVE_RANGE approach. It smells like leaking GC
internals through the API, because it assumes that code objects are in
their own space and not interleaved with other objects (which they are) and
that they lie dense within pages (which they are). I'll dwell on it a bit.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
--
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
