Weldon Washburn wrote:
On 10/27/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Weldon Washburn wrote:
> Steve Blackburn was in Portland Oregon today.  I mentioned the idea of
> adding a reference pointer from object to its j.l.Class instance. MMTk
> was
> not designed with this idea in mind. It looks like you will need to fix > this part of MMTk and maintain it yourself. Steve did not seem thrilled
at
> adding this support to MMTk code base.

Actually I think the answer may have been a little garbled along the way here: MMTk is not a memory manager *for* Java, it is simply a memory manager. We have been careful to eliminate language-specific features in the heap that it manages. MMTk has been used to manage C# (in the Rotor VM) and was being incorporated into a Haskell runtime until I ran out of time.

Therefore, MMTk knows nothing about the concept of class unloading, or java.lang.Class.

How does MMTk support class unloading then?


MMTk has no special support for class unloading. This may have something to
do with the entire system being written in Java thus class unloading come
along for free. If there needs to be a modification to support special case
objects in DRLVM, someone will need to fixup MMTk and provide onging
support of this patch in Harmony.  I have zero idea how big this effort
would be.   It would also be good to hear what the impact will be on GCV5.

MMTk implements several algorithms for retaining the reachable objects in a graph and recycling space used by unreachable ones. It relies on the host VM to provide a set of roots. It supports several different semantics of 'weak' references, including but not confined to those required by Java.

If you can implement class unloading using those (which the current proposal does), then MMTk can help.

If you want to put a pointer to the j.l.Class in the object header, MMTk will not care, as it has no way of knowing. If you put an additional pointer into the body of every object, then MMTk will see it as just another object to scan.

Remember MMTk is a memory manager, not a Java VM!


Conversely, supporting some exotic class unloading mechanism in MMTk shouldn't be hard and wouldn't deter me from trying it out. If (as a wild idea) you wanted to periodically scan the heap, and count all references to each classloader, you could implement this with very little work as a TraceLocal object, and then extend the GC plan you wanted with an additional GC phase that would periodically do one of these scans after a major GC (for example).

cheers

Reply via email to