[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous
From: |
Stefan Kangas |
Subject: |
Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Jan 2025 14:50:06 +0000 |
Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> writes:
> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> We also have a couple places where we currently call
>>>>> `inhibit_garbage_collection`. Do we need to do anything about them?
>>>>
>>>> No, it's a nop with igc. One could compile it out, maybe, but I leave
>>>> it to future generations to save these nanoseconds :-).
>>>
>>> I'd compile it out mainly for documentation purposes.
>>> I'll send a patch.
>>
>> Patch attached.
>
> LGTM
Thanks, installed as commit a24380324dd.
Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Pip Cet, 2025/01/12
Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Stefan Kangas, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Stefan Kangas, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Stefan Kangas, 2025/01/12
- Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous, Eli Zaretskii, 2025/01/12