From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <toots@rastageeks.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BD0FBBCA
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed,  2 Apr 2008 10:13:53 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAJrD8kdYvxGE/2dsb2JhbACsGg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,592,1199660400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="9090497"
Received: from www.rastageeks.org (HELO mail.rastageeks.org) ([88.191.17.132])
  by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 02 Apr 2008 10:13:53 +0200
Received: from [192.168.112.144] (sphinx.lix.polytechnique.fr [129.104.11.1])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.rastageeks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A10BE9B69F
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Wed,  2 Apr 2008 10:13:48 +0200 (CEST)
From: Romain Beauxis <toots@rastageeks.org>
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] enter_blocking_section() and string modifications
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:13:47 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9
References: <47F2F9BC.4020502@gmail.com> <20080402.130205.125897873.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> <47F30AF3.1070100@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <47F30AF3.1070100@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200804020913.47767.toots@rastageeks.org>
X-Spam: no; 0.00; lablgtk:01 compaction:01 camlprim:01 camlparam:01 mlsize:01 wosize:01 wosize:01 val:01 val:01 alloc:01 camlreturn:01 compaction:01 jamaica:98 threads:01 char:01 

Le Wednesday 02 April 2008 05:26:27 Reed Wilson, vous avez =C3=A9crit=C2=A0:
> > Here is a snippet from ml_gpointer.c, in lablgtk, which copies an
> > abstract block to the old heap when it is young. Such a block is then
> > stable as long as there is no compaction.
> >
> > CAMLprim value ml_stable_copy (value v)
> > {
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (Is_block(v) && (char*)(v) < young_end && (char*)(v) >
> > young_start) {
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 CAMLparam1(v);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 mlsize_t i, wosize =3D Wosize_val(v);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 int tag =3D Tag_val(v);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 value ret;
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (tag < No_scan_tag) invalid_argument("ml=
_stable_copy");
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ret =3D alloc_shr (wosize, tag);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 for (i=3D0; i < wosize; i++) Field(ret,i) =
=3D Field(v,i);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 CAMLreturn(ret);
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 }
> > =C2=A0 =C2=A0 return v;
> > }
> >
> > Jacques Garrigue
>
> Thanks! That's exactly what I needed to know. All of my strings are
> around 8MB, so they'll all be allocated directly on the old heap. I'll
> test to see how much memory is used up by disabling compaction.
>
> And in this case, the concurrency is definitely worth it. With 2 threads
> and 2 processors, using enter_blocking_section() raises CPU usage from
> ~50% (i.e. 100% of 1 processor) to ~75%, with a corresponding increase
> in throughput.

Isn't it possible to register a global variable for that purpose ?


Romain
=2D-=20
He say 'im that he's the first one
Who discover Jamaica, I an' I say that:
What about the Awarak indians ?