Skip to content

Inconsistency handling of immortal objects in gc #137110

@sergey-miryanov

Description

@sergey-miryanov

Bug report

Bug description:

There is some inconsistency in handling of immortal objects in default-build's GC.

In update_refs immortal objects just untracked (all immortal objects that we face in GC is an accidentally immortalized).

cpython/Python/gc.c

Lines 495 to 500 in 1e69cd1

if (_Py_IsImmortal(op)) {
assert(!_Py_IsStaticImmortal(op));
_PyObject_GC_UNTRACK(op);
gc = next;
continue;
}

update_refs called for all collections (young, increment and full). But for incremental collection if increment_size < gcstate->work_to_do we steal some objects from neighbor gen and call expand_region_transitively_reachable where immortal objects moved to permanent generation:

cpython/Python/gc.c

Lines 1397 to 1402 in 1e69cd1

if (_Py_IsImmortal(op)) {
PyGC_Head *next = GC_NEXT(gc);
gc_list_move(gc, &gcstate->permanent_generation.head);
gc = next;
continue;
}

So, one part of immortal objects can be untracked, and other part can be moved to perm gen.

As I understand from #127519 it is preferring to untrack immortal objects in all cases.

CPython versions tested on:

CPython main branch

Operating systems tested on:

No response

Linked PRs

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    interpreter-core(Objects, Python, Grammar, and Parser dirs)type-bugAn unexpected behavior, bug, or error

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions

      pFad - Phonifier reborn

      Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

      Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


      Alternative Proxies:

      Alternative Proxy

      pFad Proxy

      pFad v3 Proxy

      pFad v4 Proxy