Leopold Toetsch wrote: > Why? The bytecode is patched by a different thread *if* an > event is due (which in CPU cycles is rare). And I don't see a > thread safety problem. The (possibly different) CPU reads an > opcode and runs it. Somewhere in the meantime, the opcode at > that memory position changes to the byte sequence 0xCC (on > intel: int3 ) one byte changes, the CPU executes the trap or > not (or course changing that memory position is assumed to be > atomic, which AFAIK works on i386) - but next time in the > loop the trap is honored.
Other threads than the target could be executing the same chunk of JITted code at the same time. -- Gordon Henriksen IT Manager ICLUBcentral Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
