Re: size of the object header

thanks to all of you for your instant responses
no i hadnt thought of using the syncblock i will try doing that

regards
archana

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Jan Kotas wrote:

> The computation of offsets in CheckMscorlib does not seem to be
> accurate. Try changing:
>
> <        if (!pFD->GetMethodTableOfEnclosingClass()->IsValueClass())
> <            offset += sizeof(ObjHeader);
>
> to:
> >        if (!pFD->GetMethodTableOfEnclosingClass()->IsValueClass())
> >            offset += Object::GetOffsetOfFirstField();
>
> Have you considered using syncblock for the extra stuff you need? It
> should be much easier.
>
> -Jan
>
> This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of the Rotor Shared Source CLI implementation
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Archana
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 8:24 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [DOTNET-ROTOR] size of the object header
>
> Hi,
>  i hope you will excuse me for sending somany mails just over the past
> few
> days. once i get the hang of it, should be okay
> my changes to the collector requires the object header size to be 8
> instead of 4 which is the current obj header size. one potential place
> where i need to make changes was indicated by an Assert failure at
> binder.cpp::CheckMscorlib() where pOffsets->expectedOffset is compared
> with offset. how should i go about making the change to avoid assert
> failure. i tried looking for MscorlibFieldOffsets but not able to
> understand how its getting populated. Also if i need to make changes in
> other critical places it would of immense help if you could mention them
>
> thanks & regards
> archana
>