Patch: MAXPATHLEN usage - PR21821
Andrew Haley
aph@redhat.com
Thu Jun 2 17:19:00 GMT 2005
Bryce McKinlay writes:
> >Per> For CNI code it would be even better to use a stack-allocated
> >Per> "RawStringBuilder" struct:
> >
> >When compiling from source, gcj uses gnu.gcj.runtime.StringBuffer to
> >implement String concatenation; we could change it to stack allocate
> >this too.
>
> A potential argument against this is that was raised recently is that
> stack-allocation creates more work for the GC and increases the chance
> of "uninitialized stack holes" where dangling pointers can hide. Without
> precise stack scanning, I'm not convinced that the gains would be worth
> it compared to potential heap bloat caused by false pointers?
That's true. However, it would be possible to solve this problem
entirely by zeroing stack-allocated buffers. From what I've seen of
the overhead of conservatively scanning the stacks, this would
probably be worthwhile.
Andrew.
More information about the Java-patches
mailing list