[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] [5] Avoid storing threads in trace-buffer

From: Peter Bex
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] [5] Avoid storing threads in trace-buffer
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2017 20:21:35 +0100
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)

On Sat, Nov 04, 2017 at 08:06:59PM +0100, Jörg F. Wittenberger wrote:
> Just wondering. If memory usage was the concern, why not simple compile
> without tracing?
> This way we pay one more slot per thread. Plus some lookup. What do we earn?
> Maybe I'm missing something?

Like Christian said, if you disable tracing (you'd have to do that in
each and every library that your threads might call into!) or set the
trace buffer to a small value, you lose information if you are writing
errors to a debug log for example.

Besides, setting the trace buffer smaller is not a fix, it's a
workaround that happens to work more or less "by accident" because
of an implementation detail that's very non-obvious and arguably
not even the way it is intended to work.

What we earn is a more well-behaved runtime that has less gotchas.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]