D. A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In G. L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....references to one memory location to be transparently forwarded to another. Known variously as invisible pointers [Greenblatt74] forwarding addresses [Baker78] and memory forwarding [Luk99] they are relatively easy to implement in hardware, and are a valuable tool for safe data compaction ([Moon84], Luk99] and object migration [Jul88] Despite these advantages, however, forwarding pointers have to date been incorporated into few architectures. One reason for this is that forwarding pointers have traditionally been perceived as having limited utility. Their original intent was fairly ....

.... the Java virtual machine, including direct silicon implementation [Tremblay99] Since the Java specification includes a garbage collected memory model [Gosling96] architectures designed for Java can benefit from forwarding pointers which allow efficient incremental garbage collection ( Baker78] [Moon84]) Additionally, in [Luk99] it is shown that using forwarding pointers to perform safe data relocation can result in significant performance gains on arbitrary programs written in C, speeding up some applications by more than a factor of two. Finally, in a distributed shared memory machine, data ....

David A. Moon, "Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System", Proc. 1984 ACM Conference on Lisp and Functional Programming, pp. 235-246.

....a form of concurrent mark and sweep. This was extended by Kung and Song [22] More recently, these ideas have been revisited for ML [11, 12] and for the Java programming language [14, 13] Baker invented an incremental copying collector [5] which was implemented in hardware on Lisp machines [25]. Ellis, Li, and Appel implemented this idea on stock hardware with a virtual memory based barrier, and added true concurrency [23] However, most of these have little relevance to the present work beyond the fact they involve garbage collection and concurrency. Two other collection approaches ....

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large Lisp system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

....accessed members of objects to improve cache performance [38] Other data transformations apply specifically to heap allocated data in a garbage collected environment. Moon describes a mostly depth first copying garbage collection algorithm to improve the page locality of Lisp programs [75]. Stamos evaluates five static grouping garbage collection algorithms to improve the locality of objects [100] Courts proposes a dynamic garbage collection algorithm for improving locality [30] Wilson, Lam, and Moher propose and evaluate different static copying algorithms to improve locality in ....

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large Lisp system. In Proceedings of the 1984.

....young data to old data, though they presented no evidence that such a predominance existed. Hayes stated and cast doubt on the strong generational hypothesis [19] Important early contributions to generational collection were made by Ungar and Moon, both of whom described actual implementations [28, 34]. Not all generational collectors have been strictly younger first. Moon reported that the garbage collector of the Symbolics Lisp machine would only collect those ephemeral generations that were full [28] and the mature object space collector (usually called the train algorithm) invented by ....

....collection were made by Ungar and Moon, both of whom described actual implementations [28, 34] Not all generational collectors have been strictly younger first. Moon reported that the garbage collector of the Symbolics Lisp machine would only collect those ephemeral generations that were full [28], and the mature object space collector (usually called the train algorithm) invented by Hudson and Moss, will collect data in an order that is similar to older first but that is also influenced by the topology of the heap [15, 22] Spurred by Baker s conjecture that generational collection had ....

David A. Moon. Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System. In ACM Conference on Lisp and Functional Programming, 235--246, 1984.

....immortal, or immutable objects) 8, 14] although we do not explore this type of segregation in this paper. Any references into an increment must be tracked if that increment is to be collected independently. Pointer tracking may use remembered sets [34] card marking [39] hardware support [4, 9, 16, 26], or a combination of techniques. Card tables [39] are a common alternative to the remsets we use in Beltway. Card tables trade a fast write barrier (typically two or three machine instructions) for increased work scanning at collection time. A marked entry in the card table means that one or more ....

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Guy L. Steele, editor, Proceedings of the 1984.

....RVM [1] and present their relative performance, both to each other and to a system without barriers. Read barriers were initially considered so expensive as to only be practical with hardware support, as was done in a number of commercially available machines such as the Symbolics Lisp Machine [20]. The first implementation we know of the Brooks read barrier is that by North and Reppy [22] in their concurrent collector for Pegasus ML. However, they do not measure barrier cost but only the total cost. Zorn [25] compared the cost of hardware, software, and page protection based read ....

MOON, D. A. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

....every pointer fetched from an object. nlust be checked to see if it. points to froinspace. If it does, the from space object is copied to tospace and the pointer updated: only then is the pointer returned to the mutator. This checking requires hard ware support. to be implemented efficiently [25], since otherwise a few extra. instructions must be performed on every fetch. Furthermore. the mutator and the collector must alternate: they cannot operate truly concurrently because they might simultaneously try t,o copy the same object to different places. Instead of checking every pointer ....

....2 above. The only way that an older generation can point to a younger one is by an assignment to an already existing record. To detect such assignments, each modification of a heap object must be examined to see whether it violates property 2. This checking can be done by spe cial hardware [25,35], or by compilers [34] In the latter case, two or more instructions are required. Fortunately, non initializing assignments are rare in Lisp, Smalltalk, and similar languages [25,35,30,3] but the overhead of the instruction sequence for checking (without special hardware) is still on the order of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, pages 235-246. 1984.

.... for several commercially viable systems, collectively referred to as the Lisp Machine [4] Again, few published details are available on the details of this operating system, though we note that for example the Symbolics 3600 series uses a real time, incremental, and copying garbage collection [15] with substantially better real time properties than the garbage collector we use, which comes from SML NJ runtime system. The Spin operating system [5] is perhaps the closest to Hello in spirit, though the language of choice for Spin is Modula 3 rather than SML. Modula 3 allows for selective ....

David A. Moon. Garbage Collection in Large Lisp System. ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, August 1984, Austin, Texas.

....SPECjvm98 benchmarks and pBOB. They use the Jikes RVM to trace high level heap accesses and then use a simulator to correlate cache and TLB misses with object sizes and layouts. 6. 2 Generational garbage collection There has been significant prior work on collectors that partition objects by age [26, 27, 39, 25, 42]. The most common of these collectors are generational collectors. Generational collectors generally have poor performance if a significant number of objects do not obey the generational hypotheses. Prior work has proposed many variations and enhancements to generational collectors. Objects that ....

D. Moon. Garbage collection in a large Lisp system. In Lisp and functional programming, 1984.

....there is no conflict. Other researchers have noted the significance of traversal order to application and collector performance. Such work focuses on using a copying collector as a convenient mechanism for reorganizing the heap for better memory locality at various levels of the memory hierarchy [77, 56, 48]. 6.1.5 Tactical Load Balancing While it is important that there are enough items in the working set to permit load balancing, it is equally important to prevent unnecessary loadbalancing. In fact, most processors are already not idle during most of the collections so no load balancing is ....

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Steele

....GC Mesarthim s node local garbage collection is based on a combination of three garbage collection mechanisms: Baker s incremental copying collector [3] card marking [65] and SFA aware IRC. Its design is inspired in part by the GC strategies of ORSLA [7] and the Symbolics Lisp Machine [48]. Area GC Individual areas are garbage collected using Baker s incremental copying collector. Two factors led me to employ this algorithm. First, in a parallel system, an individual node which asynchronously stops to perform garbage collection can become a bottleneck as other nodes stall while ....

....for tracking inter area pointers. Mesarthim employs two separate mechanisms: a simple, lowoverhead mechanism for tracking inter area pointers within physical memory ( in core inter area pointers) and a more complex mechanism for tracking inter area pointers from secondary storage. Card marking [48, 65] used to track in core inter area pointers. Each page is divided into four cards. When a pointer to one area is written into a card belonging to another area, the card is marked as dirty. When any area performs local garbage collection, it must sweep every dirty card in other areas for incoming ....

David Moon. Garbage collection in a large lisp system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

....GC Mesarthim s node local garbage collection is based on a combination of three garbage collection mechanisms: Baker s incremental copying collector [3] card marking [65] and SFA aware IRC. Its design is inspired in part by the GC strategies of ORSLA [7] and the Symbolics Lisp Machine [48]. Area GC Individual areas are garbage collected using Baker s incremental copying collector. Two factors led me to employ this algorithm. First, in a parallel system, an individual node which asynchronously stops to perform garbage collection can become a bottleneck as other nodes stall while ....

....for tracking inter area pointers. Mesarthim employs two separate mechanisms: a simple, low overhead mechanism for tracking inter area pointers within physical memory ( in core inter area pointers) and a more complex mechanism for tracking inter area pointers from secondary storage. Card marking [48, 65] used to track in core inter area pointers. Each page is divided into four cards. When a pointer to one area is written into a card belonging to another area, the card is marked as dirty. When any area performs local garbage collection, it must sweep every dirty card in other areas for incoming ....

David Moon. Garbage collection in a large lisp system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

.... original work in 1960 [12] many di erent garbage collection algorithms have been developed [6, 2, 19] Among the basic garbage collection techniques are mark sweep [12, 20] mark compact [7] and copying garbage collection [4, 8] In the last decade or so, generational garbage collection (GGC) [11, 17, 13] has become one of the most important garbage collection techniques. 1.1 Generational Garbage Collection GGC divides the heap into two or more areas, called generations, containing objects of di erent ages. For simplicity, we describe only the 2 generation case here. Objects are allocated in the ....

David Moon. Garbage collection in a large lisp system. In Proceedings of the

No context found.

D. A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In G. L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

D. A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

D. A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In G. L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

D. A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Guy L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large Lisp system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

MOON, D. A. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Guy L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Guy L. Steele, editor, Conference Record of the 1984.

No context found.

David A. Moon, "Garbage Collection in a Large Lisp System", Proc. 1984 ACM Conference on Lisp and Functional Programming, pp. 235-246.

No context found.

David A. Moon. Garbage collection in a large LISP system. In Steele [Steele1984], pages 235--245.

No context found.

D. A. Moon, `Garbage collection in a large Lisp system', Conference Record of the 1984 ACM Symposium on LISP and Functional Programming, Austin, Texas, August 1984, pp. 235--246.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC