[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOJsxLG6Q=zr8kqcds7jWzpGqqy2GV10YERb9njMzM8y7kS55A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:04:28 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To: Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, leonid.moiseichuk@...ia.com,
kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
mel@....ul.ie, rientjes@...gle.com,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ronen Hod <rhod@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] low memory notify
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Colin Walters <walters@...bum.org> wrote:
> So what you really want to be investigating here is integration between
> a garbage collector and the system VM. Your test program looks nothing
> like a garbage collector. I'd expect most of the performance tradeoffs
> to be similar between these runtimes. The Azul people have been doing
> something like this: http://www.managedruntime.org/
The interraction isn't all that complex, really. I'd expect most VMs
to simply wake up the GC thread when poll() returns. GCs that are able
to compact the heap can madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) or even munmap() unused
parts of the heap.
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists