DOCSLIB.ORG

Ownership Types for Safe Region-Based Memory Management in Real-Time Java

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ownership Types for Safe Region-Based Memory Management in Real-Time Java ACM Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (PLDI), June 2003 Ownership Types for Safe Region-Based Memory Management in Real-Time Java Chandrasekhar Boyapati, Alexandru Salcianu,˘ William Beebee, Jr., Martin Rinard MIT Laboratory for Computer Science 200 Technology Square, Cambridge, MA 02139 {chandra,salcianu,wbeebee,rinard}@lcs.mit.edu Abstract Keywords The Real-Time Specification for Java (RTSJ) allows a pro- Ownership Types, Regions, Encapsulation, Real-Time gram to create real-time threads with hard real-time con- straints. Real-time threads use region-based memory man- agement to avoid unbounded pauses caused by interference 1. Introduction from the garbage collector. The RTSJ uses runtime checks The Real-Time Specification for Java (RTSJ) [8] provides to ensure that deleting a region does not create dangling ref- a framework for building real-time systems. The RTSJ al- erences and that real-time threads do not access references lows a program to create real-time threads with hard real- to objects allocated in the garbage-collected heap. This pa- time constraints. These real-time threads cannot use the per presents a static type system that guarantees that these garbage-collected heap because they cannot afford to be in- runtime checks will never fail for well-typed programs. Our terrupted for unbounded amounts of time by the garbage type system therefore 1) provides an important safety guar- collector. Instead, the RTSJ allows these threads to use ob- antee for real-time programs and 2) makes it possible to jects allocated in immortal memory (which is never garbage eliminate the runtime checks and their associated overhead. collected) or in regions [42]. Region-based memory manage- Our system also makes several contributions over previ- ment systems structure memory by grouping objects in re- ous work on region types. For object-oriented programs, it gions under program control. Memory is reclaimed by delet- combines the benefits of region types and ownership types ing regions, freeing all objects stored therein. The RTSJ in a unified type system framework. For multithreaded pro- uses runtime checks to ensure that deleting a region does grams, it allows long-lived threads to share objects without not create dangling references and that real-time threads do using the heap and without memory leaks. For real-time not access heap references. programs, it ensures that real-time threads do not interfere This paper presents a static type system for writing real- with the garbage collector. Our experience indicates that time programs in Java. Our system guarantees that the our type system is sufficiently expressive and requires lit- RTSJ runtime checks will never fail for well-typed programs. tle programming overhead, and that eliminating the RTSJ Our system thus serves as a front-end for the RTSJ platform. runtime checks using a static type system can significantly It offers two advantages to real-time programmers. First, it decrease the execution time of real-time programs. provides an important safety guarantee that a program will never fail because of a failed RTSJ runtime check. Second, it Categories and Subject Descriptors allows RTSJ implementations to remove the RTSJ runtime checks and eliminate the associated overhead. D.3.3 [Programming Languages]: Language Constructs; Our approach is applicable even outside the RTSJ context; D.2.4 [Software Engineering]: Program Verification; it could be adapted to provide safe region-based memory C.3 [Special-Purpose Systems]: Real-time Systems management for other real-time languages as well. General Terms Our system makes several important technical contribu- Languages, Verification, Theory tions over previous type systems for region-based memory management. For object-oriented programs, it combines re- This research was supported by DARPA/AFRL Contract F33615- gion types [16, 23, 34, 42] and ownership types [11, 12, 14, 00-C-1692, NSF Grant CCR00-86154, NSF Grant CCR00-73513, 18, 19] in a unified type system framework. Region types NSF Grant CCR02-09075, and the Singapore-MIT Alliance. statically ensure that programs never follow dangling refer- ences. Ownership types statically enforce object encapsula- tion and enable modular reasoning about program correct- ness in object-oriented programs. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for Consider, for example, a Stack object s that is imple- personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are mented using a Vector subobject v. To reason locally about not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies the correctness of the Stack implementation, a programmer bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise, to must know that v is not directly accessed by objects outside republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific s. With ownership types, a programmer can declare that s permission and/or a fee. PLDI’03, June 9–11, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. owns v. The type system then statically ensures that v is Copyright 2003 ACM 1-58113-662-5/03/0006 ...$5.00. encapsulated within s. 324 In an object-oriented language that only has region types The unified ownership type system requires little program- (e.g., [16]), the types of s and v would declare that they are ming overhead, its typechecking is fast and scalable, and it allocated in some region r. In an object-oriented language provides several benefits. The unified ownership type system that only has ownership types, the type of v would declare thus offers a promising approach for making object-oriented that it is owned by s. Our type system provides a simple programs more reliable. unified mechanism to declare both properties. The type of s can declare that it is allocated in r and the type of v can Contributions declare that it is owned by s. Our system then statically To summarize, this paper makes the following contributions: ensures that both objects are allocated in r, that there are no pointers to v and s after r is deleted, and that v is en- • Region types for object-oriented programs: Our capsulated within s. Our system thus combines the benefits system combines region types and ownership types in a of region types and ownership types. unified type system framework that statically enforces object encapsulation as well as enables safe region- Our system extends region types to multithreaded pro- based memory management. grams by allowing explicit memory management for objects shared between threads. It allows threads to communicate • Region types for multithreaded programs: Our through objects in shared regions in addition to the heap. system introduces 1) subregions within a shared region, A shared region is deleted when all threads exit the region. so that long-lived threads can share objects without However, programs in a system with only shared regions using the heap and without memory leaks and 2) typed (e.g., [33]) will have memory leaks if two long-lived threads portal fields to serve as a starting point for typed inter- communicate by creating objects in a shared region. This thread communication. It also introduces user-defined is because the objects will not be deleted until both threads region kinds to support subregions and portals. exit the shared region. To solve this problem, we introduce • Region types for real-time programs: Our system the notion of subregions within a shared region. A subregion allows programs to create LT (Linear Time) and VT can be deleted more frequently, for example, after each loop (Variable Time) regions as in the RTSJ. It checks that iteration in the long-lived threads. real-time threads do not use heap references, create Our system also introduces typed portal fields in subre- new regions, or allocate objects in VT regions, so that gions to serve as a starting point for inter-thread communi- they do not wait for unbounded amounts of time. It cation. Portals also allow typed communication, so threads also prevents an RTSJ priority inversion problem. do not have to downcast from Object to more specific types. Our approach therefore avoids any dynamic type errors as- • Type inference: Our system uses a combination sociated with these downcasts. Our system introduces user- of intra-procedural type inference and well-chosen de- defined region kinds to support subregions and portal fields. faults to significantly reduce programming overhead. Our system extends region types to real-time programs Our approach permits separate compilation. by statically ensuring that real-time threads do not inter- • Experience: We have implemented several programs fere with the garbage collector. Our system augments re- in our system. Our experience indicates that our type gion kind declarations with region policy declarations. It system is sufficiently expressive and requires little pro- supports two policies for creating regions as in the RTSJ. A gramming overhead. We also ran the programs on our region can be an LT (Linear Time) region, or a VT (Vari- RTSJ platform [6, 7]. Our experiments show that elim- able Time) region. Memory for an LT region is preallocated inating the RTSJ runtime checks using a static type at region creation time, so allocating an object in an LT system can significantly speed-up programs. region only takes time proportional to the size of the object (because all the bytes have to be zeroed). Memory for a VT The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes our region is allocated on demand, so allocating an object in a type system. Section 3 describes our experimental results. VT region takes variable time. Our system checks that real- Section 4 presents related work. Section 5 concludes. time threads do not use heap references, create new regions, or allocate objects in VT regions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Memory Management and Garbage Collection
    Overview Memory Management Stack: Data on stack (local variables on activation records) have lifetime that coincides with the life of a procedure call. Memory for stack data is allocated on entry to procedures ::: ::: and de-allocated on return. Heap: Data on heap have lifetimes that may differ from the life of a procedure call. Memory for heap data is allocated on demand (e.g. malloc, new, etc.) ::: ::: and released Manually: e.g. using free Automatically: e.g. using a garbage collector Compilers Memory Management CSE 304/504 1 / 16 Overview Memory Allocation Heap memory is divided into free and used. Free memory is kept in a data structure, usually a free list. When a new chunk of memory is needed, a chunk from the free list is returned (after marking it as used). When a chunk of memory is freed, it is added to the free list (after marking it as free) Compilers Memory Management CSE 304/504 2 / 16 Overview Fragmentation Free space is said to be fragmented when free chunks are not contiguous. Fragmentation is reduced by: Maintaining different-sized free lists (e.g. free 8-byte cells, free 16-byte cells etc.) and allocating out of the appropriate list. If a small chunk is not available (e.g. no free 8-byte cells), grab a larger chunk (say, a 32-byte chunk), subdivide it (into 4 smaller chunks) and allocate. When a small chunk is freed, check if it can be merged with adjacent areas to make a larger chunk. Compilers Memory Management CSE 304/504 3 / 16 Overview Manual Memory Management Programmer has full control over memory ::: with the responsibility to manage it well Premature free's lead to dangling references Overly conservative free's lead to memory leaks With manual free's it is virtually impossible to ensure that a program is correct and secure.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Snowflake: Non-Blocking Safe Manual Memory Management in .NET
    Project Snowflake: Non-blocking Safe Manual Memory Management in .NET Matthew Parkinson Dimitrios Vytiniotis Kapil Vaswani Manuel Costa Pantazis Deligiannis Microsoft Research Dylan McDermott Aaron Blankstein Jonathan Balkind University of Cambridge Princeton University July 26, 2017 Abstract Garbage collection greatly improves programmer productivity and ensures memory safety. Manual memory management on the other hand often delivers better performance but is typically unsafe and can lead to system crashes or security vulnerabilities. We propose integrating safe manual memory management with garbage collection in the .NET runtime to get the best of both worlds. In our design, programmers can choose between allocating objects in the garbage collected heap or the manual heap. All existing applications run unmodified, and without any performance degradation, using the garbage collected heap. Our programming model for manual memory management is flexible: although objects in the manual heap can have a single owning pointer, we allow deallocation at any program point and concurrent sharing of these objects amongst all the threads in the program. Experimental results from our .NET CoreCLR implementation on real-world applications show substantial performance gains especially in multithreaded scenarios: up to 3x savings in peak working sets and 2x improvements in runtime. 1 Introduction The importance of garbage collection (GC) in modern software cannot be overstated. GC greatly improves programmer productivity because it frees programmers from the burden of thinking about object lifetimes and freeing memory. Even more importantly, GC prevents temporal memory safety errors, i.e., uses of memory after it has been freed, which often lead to security breaches. Modern generational collectors, such as the .NET GC, deliver great throughput through a combination of fast thread-local bump allocation and cheap collection of young objects [63, 18, 61].
    [Show full text]
  • Transparent Garbage Collection for C++
    Document Number: WG21/N1833=05-0093 Date: 2005-06-24 Reply to: Hans-J. Boehm [email protected] 1501 Page Mill Rd., MS 1138 Palo Alto CA 94304 USA Transparent Garbage Collection for C++ Hans Boehm Michael Spertus Abstract A number of possible approaches to automatic memory management in C++ have been considered over the years. Here we propose the re- consideration of an approach that relies on partially conservative garbage collection. Its principal advantage is that objects referenced by ordinary pointers may be garbage-collected. Unlike other approaches, this makes it possible to garbage-collect ob- jects allocated and manipulated by most legacy libraries. This makes it much easier to convert existing code to a garbage-collected environment. It also means that it can be used, for example, to “repair” legacy code with deficient memory management. The approach taken here is similar to that taken by Bjarne Strous- trup’s much earlier proposal (N0932=96-0114). Based on prior discussion on the core reflector, this version does insist that implementations make an attempt at garbage collection if so requested by the application. How- ever, since there is no real notion of space usage in the standard, there is no way to make this a substantive requirement. An implementation that “garbage collects” by deallocating all collectable memory at process exit will remain conforming, though it is likely to be unsatisfactory for some uses. 1 Introduction A number of different mechanisms for adding automatic memory reclamation (garbage collection) to C++ have been considered: 1. Smart-pointer-based approaches which recycle objects no longer ref- erenced via special library-defined replacement pointer types.
    [Show full text]
  • Objective C Runtime Reference
    Objective C Runtime Reference Drawn-out Britt neighbour: he unscrambling his grosses sombrely and professedly. Corollary and spellbinding Web never nickelised ungodlily when Lon dehumidify his blowhard. Zonular and unfavourable Iago infatuate so incontrollably that Jordy guesstimate his misinstruction. Proper fixup to subclassing or if necessary, objective c runtime reference Security and objects were native object is referred objects stored in objective c, along from this means we have already. Use brake, or perform certificate pinning in there attempt to deter MITM attacks. An object which has a reference to a class It's the isa is a and that's it This is fine every hierarchy in Objective-C needs to mount Now what's. Use direct access control the man page. This function allows us to voluntary a reference on every self object. The exception handling code uses a header file implementing the generic parts of the Itanium EH ABI. If the method is almost in the cache, thanks to Medium Members. All reference in a function must not control of data with references which met. Understanding the Objective-C Runtime Logo Table Of Contents. Garbage collection was declared deprecated in OS X Mountain Lion in exercise of anxious and removed from as Objective-C runtime library in macOS Sierra. Objective-C Runtime Reference. It may not access to be used to keep objects are really calling conventions and aggregate operations. Thank has for putting so in effort than your posts. This will cut down on the alien of Objective C runtime information. Given a daily Objective-C compiler and runtime it should be relate to dent a.
    [Show full text]
  • Programming Language Concepts Memory Management in Different
    Programming Language Concepts Memory management in different languages Janyl Jumadinova 13 April, 2017 I Use external software, such as the Boehm-Demers-Weiser collector (a.k.a. Boehm GC), to do garbage collection in C/C++: { use Boehm instead of traditional malloc and free in C http://hboehm.info/gc/ C I Memory management is typically manual: { the standard library functions for memory management in C, malloc and free, have become almost synonymous with manual memory management. 2/16 C I Memory management is typically manual: { the standard library functions for memory management in C, malloc and free, have become almost synonymous with manual memory management. I Use external software, such as the Boehm-Demers-Weiser collector (a.k.a. Boehm GC), to do garbage collection in C/C++: { use Boehm instead of traditional malloc and free in C http://hboehm.info/gc/ 2/16 I In addition to Boehm, we can use smart pointers as a memory management solution. C++ I The standard library functions for memory management in C++ are new and delete. I The higher abstraction level of C++ makes the bookkeeping required for manual memory management even harder than C. 3/16 C++ I The standard library functions for memory management in C++ are new and delete. I The higher abstraction level of C++ makes the bookkeeping required for manual memory management even harder than C. I In addition to Boehm, we can use smart pointers as a memory management solution. 3/16 Smart pointer: // declare a smart pointer on stack // and pass it the raw pointer SomeSmartPtr<MyObject> ptr(new MyObject()); ptr->DoSomething(); // use the object in some way // destruction of the object happens automatically C++ Raw pointer: MyClass *ptr = new MyClass(); ptr->doSomething(); delete ptr; // destroy the object.
    [Show full text]
  • Memory Management Algorithms and Implementation in C/C++
    Memory Management Algorithms and Implementation in C/C++ by Bill Blunden Wordware Publishing, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Blunden, Bill, 1969- Memory management: algorithms and implementation in C/C++ / by Bill Blunden. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-55622-347-1 1. Memory management (Computer science) 2. Computer algorithms. 3. C (Computer program language) 4. C++ (Computer program language) I. Title. QA76.9.M45 .B558 2002 005.4'35--dc21 2002012447 CIP © 2003, Wordware Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved 2320 Los Rios Boulevard Plano, Texas 75074 No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from Wordware Publishing, Inc. Printed in the United States of America ISBN 1-55622-347-1 10987654321 0208 Product names mentioned are used for identification purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective companies. All inquiries for volume purchases of this book should be addressed to Wordware Publishing, Inc., at the above address. Telephone inquiries may be made by calling: (972) 423-0090 This book is dedicated to Rob, Julie, and Theo. And also to David M. Lee “I came to learn physics, and I got Jimmy Stewart” iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments......................xi Introduction.........................xiii Chapter 1 Memory Management Mechanisms. 1 MechanismVersusPolicy..................1 MemoryHierarchy......................3 AddressLinesandBuses...................9 Intel Pentium Architecture . 11 RealModeOperation...................14 Protected Mode Operation. 18 Protected Mode Segmentation . 19 ProtectedModePaging................26 PagingasProtection..................31 Addresses: Logical, Linear, and Physical . 33 PageFramesandPages................34 Case Study: Switching to Protected Mode . 35 ClosingThoughts......................42 References..........................43 Chapter 2 Memory Management Policies.
    [Show full text]
  • Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C 2501ICT/7421ICT Nathan
    Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Advanced Topics Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C 2501ICT/7421ICT Nathan René Hexel School of Information and Communication Technology Griffith University Semester 1, 2012 René Hexel Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Advanced Topics Outline 1 Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Subclasses and Access Control Class Methods 2 Advanced Topics Memory Management Strings René Hexel Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Subclasses and Access Control Advanced Topics Class Methods Objective-C Subclasses Objective-C Subclasses René Hexel Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Subclasses and Access Control Advanced Topics Class Methods Subclasses in Objective-C Classes can extend other classes @interface AClass: NSObject every class should extend at least NSObject, the root class to subclass a different class, replace NSObject with the class you want to extend self references the current object super references the parent class for method invocations René Hexel Object Oriented Programming in Objective-C Subclasses, Access Control, and Class Methods Subclasses and Access Control Advanced Topics Class Methods Creating Subclasses: Point3D Parent Class: Point.h Child Class: Point3D.h #import <Foundation/Foundation.h> #import "Point.h" @interface Point: NSObject @interface Point3D: Point { { int x; // member variables int z; // add z dimension
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Garbage Collection Garbage Collection (GC) Is the Automatic
    Basic Garbage Collection Garbage Collection (GC) is the automatic reclamation of heap records that will never again be accessed by the program. GC is universally used for languages with closures and complex data structures that are implicitly heap-allocated. GC may be useful for any language that supports heap allocation, because it obviates the need for explicit deallocation, which is tedious, error-prone, and often non- modular. GC technology is increasingly interesting for “conventional” language implementation, especially as users discover that free isn’t free. i.e., explicit memory management can be costly too. We view GC as part of an allocation service provided by the runtime environment to the user program, usually called the mutator( user program). When the mutator needs heap space, it calls an allocation routine, which in turn performs garbage collection activities if needed. Many high-level programming languages remove the burden of manual memory management from the programmer by offering automatic garbage collection, which deallocates unreachable data. Garbage collection dates back to the initial implementation of Lisp in 1958. Other significant languages that offer garbage collection include Java, Perl, ML, Modula-3, Prolog, and Smalltalk. Principles The basic principles of garbage collection are: 1. Find data objects in a program that cannot be accessed in the future 2. Reclaim the resources used by those objects Many computer languages require garbage collection, either as part of the language specification (e.g., Java, C#, and most scripting languages) or effectively for practical implementation (e.g., formal languages like lambda calculus); these are said to be garbage collected languages.
    [Show full text]
  • Simple, Fast and Safe Manual Memory Management
    Simple, Fast and Safe Manual Memory Management Piyus Kedia Manuel Costa Matthew Aaron Blankstein ∗ Microsoft Research, India Parkinson Kapil Vaswani Princeton University, USA [email protected] Dimitrios Vytiniotis [email protected] Microsoft Research, UK manuelc,mattpark,kapilv,[email protected] Abstract cause the latter are more efficient. As a consequence, many Safe programming languages are readily available, but many applications continue to have exploitable memory safety applications continue to be written in unsafe languages be- bugs. One of the main reasons behind the higher efficiency cause of efficiency. As a consequence, many applications of unsafe languages is that they typically use manual mem- continue to have exploitable memory safety bugs. Since ory management, which has been shown to be more efficient garbage collection is a major source of inefficiency in the than garbage collection [19, 21, 24, 33, 34, 45]. Thus, replac- implementation of safe languages, replacing it with safe ing garbage collection with manual memory management in manual memory management would be an important step safe languages would be an important step towards solv- towards solving this problem. ing this problem. The challenge is how to implement man- Previous approaches to safe manual memory manage- ual memory management efficiently, without compromising ment use programming models based on regions, unique safety. pointers, borrowing of references, and ownership types. We Previous approaches to safe manual memory manage- propose a much simpler programming model that does not ment use programming models based on regions [20, 40], require any of these concepts. Starting from the design of an unique pointers [22, 38], borrowing of references [11, 12, imperative type safe language (like Java or C#), we just add 42], and ownership types [10, 12, 13].
    [Show full text]
  • Memscope: Analyzing Memory Duplication on Android Systems
    MemScope: Analyzing Memory Duplication on Android Systems Byeoksan Lee, Seong Min Kim, Eru Park, Dongsu Han KAIST Abstract tion (e.g., log-in) when the app is reloaded. Additionally, it leads to longer reload time [15]. Main memory is one of the most important and valuable As users run an increasing number of applications and resources in mobile devices. While resource efficiency, in each application becomes more complex, the memory pres- general, is important in mobile computing where programs sure on mobile devices is increasing. This coupled with the run on limited battery power and resources, managing main rise of low memory devices [5] makes the problem even memory is especially critical because it has a significant more important. Android itself tried to reduce system mem- impact on user experience. However, there is mounting ory footprint and produced a way to tune the system for low evidence that Android systems do not utilize main memory memory devices [6]. However, there is mounting evidence efficiently, and actually cause page-level duplications in the that Android systems do not utilize main memory efficiently, physical memory. This paper takes the first step in accurately and actually cause page-level duplications in the physical measuring the level of memory duplication and diagnosing memory [5, 13]. the root cause of the problem. To this end, we develop a To mitigate the problem, Android has introduced several system called MemScope that automatically identifies and mechanisms to optimize the system for low memory de- measures memory duplication levels for Android systems. It vices, such as Kernel Same-page Merging (KSM) [8] and identifies which memory segment contains duplicate memory zRAM [12].
    [Show full text]
  • Optimization Techniques for Memory Virtualization-Based Resource Management
    SSStttooonnnyyy BBBrrrooooookkk UUUnnniiivvveeerrrsssiiitttyyy The official electronic file of this thesis or dissertation is maintained by the University Libraries on behalf of The Graduate School at Stony Brook University. ©©© AAAllllll RRRiiiggghhhtttsss RRReeessseeerrrvvveeeddd bbbyyy AAAuuuttthhhooorrr... Optimization Techniques for Memory Virtualization-based Resource Management A Dissertation Presented by Jui-Hao Chiang to The Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science Stony Brook University December 2012 Stony Brook University The Graduate School Jui-Hao Chiang We, the dissertation committee for the above candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, hereby recommend acceptance of this dissertation. Tzi-cker Chiueh { Dissertation Advisor Professor, Department of Computer Science Jie Gao { Chairperson of Defense Associate Professor, Department of Computer Science Rob Johnson Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Science Ted Teng Professor, Department of Technology and Society This dissertation is accepted by the Graduate School. Charles Taber Interim Dean of the Graduate School ii Abstract of the Dissertation Optimization Techniques for Memory Virtualization-based Resource Management by Jui-Hao Chiang Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science Stony Brook University 2012 Memory virtualization abstracts the physical memory resources in a virtualized server in such a way that offers many resource man- agement advantages, such as consolidation, sharing,
    [Show full text]
  • Mostly Concurrent Garbage Collection
    Mostly Concurrent Garbage Collection Marco Ammon [email protected] Lehrstuhl für Informatik 4 Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg Erlangen, Germany ABSTRACT For performing an accurate reachability analysis, program execu- Automated Garbage Collection (GC) is desired for many applications tion is usually halted during garbage collection, which is called a due to difficulties with manual memory management. Conventional stop-the-world (STW) approach. tracing garbage collectors require a complete halt of the program Consequently, as this process requires to scan large portions of while unreachable objects are detected and reclaimed. However, the the heap, application latency can significantly increase due to long resulting increased latency is not always tolerable. This paper gives pauses. In particular for interactive applications, web services, or an introduction into GC fundamentals before thoroughly explaining real-time constrained programs, this may not be tolerable [8, 13, 27]. and discussing the mostly concurrent mark-and-sweep algorithm Hence, alternatives to the STW method are often desired. presented in [8]. The approach is based on the principle of combin- In Section 2, different approaches to tracing garbage collectors ing a concurrent marking phase with a short stop-the-world pause are presented. Section 3 explains and discusses a particular algo- to process modifications which occurred simultaneously. Addition- rithm for mostly concurrent GC [8] proposed by Boehm et al., which ally, the influence of this concept on modern garbage collectors on combines a short stop-the-world phase with longer, concurrently the Java Virtual Machine is reviewed. executed marking operations. Given the historic significance, its in- fluence on some contemporary GC algorithms for the popular Java Virtual Machine (JVM) is reviewed in Section 4.
    [Show full text]