[M3devel] friendly reminder/request for cooperative suspend

[Antony Hosking]

Yes, this is on the top of my list of things to do.
Plus fix some atomics bugs.
atomics plus cooperative suspend gives us a much better story on locks too.
We could even have a proper memory model like C++11.

LLVM would also be great (better even than the C backend) because we’d get some decent optimization passes.


On Sep 14, 2012, at 4:01 AM, Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu> wrote:

> friendly reminder/request: I'd like to see the system changed to use cooperative suspend.
> 
> 
> Combined with a C backend, that would greatly expand portability and remove existing target-dependent code (i.e. already ported) from the system.
> 
> 
> I'm not confident that GetThreadContext works on "wow64".
> It'd fix that.
> 
> 
> We can compute the top/bottom of the stack fairly portably -- address of locals.
> We can capture current context/registers via setjmp.
> Or maybe getcontext.
> (We should find out about setjmp/longjmp munging -- what gets munged? Everything? Just non-gc-roots? Only after longjmp?)
> Itanium is special -- there is a second stack growing up from the same base.
> 
> 
> I'd like this way more than LLVM.
> 
> 
> Maybe I can work on. Maybe.
> 
> 
> I believe typical production Java VMs use cooperative suspend.
> 
> 
>  - Jay

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20120914/d935d8ae/attachment-0002.html>