From: Nikodemus S. <nik...@ra...> - 2014-02-12 21:14:45
|
> On 12 February 2014 09:52, Nikodemus Siivola <nik...@ra...> wrote: > >> Might work, though I would not be terribly surprised if I'm >> overlooking something. So, I was overlooking something. It's not obvious to me why we're preserving the whole allocation region, instead of just the page, but it *does* seem quite intentional. Most annoyingly there are comments saying that we do just that, but nothing that explains the reason that I can see. Would need to read more and more carefully to figure that out. If I were to hack on this, and if spending a few hours reading the code didn't yield further insights, I might first try to implement the exact tracking the the (common?) special case of an allocation region spanning exactly one page only, or making preserve_pointer preserve only the pages spanned by the object and seeing what breaks... Cheers, -- nikodemus |