[Openmcl-devel] Patch: ALLOC-LAP-OPERAND-VECTOR

James Bielman jamesjb at jamesjb.com
Mon Jul 11 10:46:08 UTC 2005


Gary Byers <gb at clozure.com> writes:

> Hm.  It's 4AM here, so I'm not sure that I fully trust my knee-jerk
> reaction, but my knee-jerk reaction is that (since these things are
> aggressively free-listed) we'll need to be careful about mixing sizes.
> (E.g., if we're cross-compiling targeting the ARM from a PPC host,
> we wouldn't want the ARM to blindly grab a 5-element vector that
> the PPC had put on the freelist.)
>
> Maybe the right thing to do is to always cons up a fresh vector
> when cross-compiling (if the target LAP has a different max
> operand count than the host.)
>
> It's been a long time since I've seriously tried to evaluate the
> cost of freelisting vs allocation/GC; when I last did so, freelisting
> won.

Ohh.. d'oh.  Somehow I blew right past noticing that these were being
recycled (probably because I'm wasn't freeing them).  I'll just cons
up fresh vectors for now since I'm not worried about performance yet.

James



More information about the Openmcl-devel mailing list