this version already been identified?
Thanks,
Rana Dasgupta
Intel Middleware Development
On 5/4/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great! Good progress.
Here is mine:
gcc (GCC) 3.4.6 (Gentoo 3.4.6-r1, ssp-3.4.5-1.0, pie-8.7.9)
Gcc-4.x is masked in gentoo, so I have started with gcc
Ivan,
Excellent. Pls submit to JIRA and link to original contribution, as Geir
suggests. Also attach some submission notes including successful build log
:-)
Rana
On 5/5/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have made work release version of DRLVM build with GCC-4.1.0.
A small
bit port.
Thanks,
Rana Dasgupta
Intel Middleware Development.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
implementation forward to be
OPEN compatible.
Thanks,
Rana Dasgupta
Intel Middleware Development
- Operations over primitive types: getByte, getDouble,setBoolean
- Operations over arrays of primitive types: getChar(char[] buf,..)
- Search operations: findFirstDiff, findFirstDiffReorder
On 5/13/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Alongside the DRLVM codebase, here
Hi,
Is there an expectation of a standardised deployment model for the Harmony
compliant VM's like DRLVM and others? Eg., should they all produce binaries
that can be unpacked to overlay the Harmony Classlib deployment structure
as can the IBM VME? At some point, we will be posting distributions
Hi,
This is why I had asked the question of VM binary layout compatibility on
the Single Module thread. ( no link ) :-) What Oliver is saying sounds
reasonable to me. Please see below..
On 5/18/06, Oliver Deakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
Well, may be I'm missing some
On 5/18/06, Andrey Chernyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That should work as well, at least for class libs. Actually I was
thinking of HDK containing the pre-compiled binaries for all modules,
not just the ones from the class libraries. VM developers would
probably want to be able to work on a
Hi Weldon,
Does your research show that MMTk has a functional dependency on Write
Barriers? My understanding of write barriers is as an optimization. Also,
the contribution GC is not generational. So..I am not sure how this would be
tested etc.
Thanks,
Rana
On 5/23/06, Weldon Washburn
On 5/31/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/5/31, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
No, this method is used to store operand stack item to local
variable. If
you're interested in writing to fields then Compiler::gen_field_op is
the
right place. We can generate a call to VM or GC
PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/6/1, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 5/31/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/6/1, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
We have in DRLVM implementation the atomic exchange of value
stored in
object field. It is required IMO for the j.u.atomics
Hi Ivan,
On 6/13/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Btw, I have found small performance improvement to GCv4 which can be
easily added to it.
Could you please post more details about this possible perf enhancement
to V4?
...
Well, I'm going to do this development just for
also help.
Thanks much,
Rana
On 6/13/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/13/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Ivan,
On 6/13/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Btw, I have found small performance improvement to GCv4 which can be
easily added
On 6/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Talking of this maybe enable debug by default for DRL VM? It is used by
developers for development for the most part at the moment so
assertions and
symbol info may be quite useful. Also debug is built faster because it
is not
Hi Gregory/Geir,
Sorry for jumping in, but I have a question...
On 6/16/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This method as the name says allocates a java.lang.Class instance for the
requested class and assigns class handle to the C native Class struct.
But
java.lang.Class cannot
Sorry for these multiple postbacks
On 6/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The assert makes sense as a safety, IMO.
Notice how it caught this which hinted at work that had to be done
elsewhere.
Yes, but the assert should not be giving us misleading information. If it
Pls see below...
On 6/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In which case, we may be better off updating DRLVM to
handle the full 1.5 compile instead of doing these hardloads.
What is a hardload?
Typo :-) hardcoding the creation of the lang/Class superinterfaces.
And
On 6/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to start assembling a high-level roadmap of the milestones we'd
like to achieve in the next 12 months.
I volunteer to track and organize, but this clearly is a community
activity so lets start by just tossing out ideas.
1) By
On 6/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Build and dependency issues aside, what are the next functional
enhancements / features for DRLVM?
I think #1 is to get it to function with Java 5 classfiles, so we can
make the switch throughout the project.
Geir,
Good question. By
On 6/21/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes it will work with Jitrino.JET and for now only wirh it. This is done
because compilation optimizations may lose exact bytecode and local
variables mapping which are required for debugging. If JVMTI is enabled
on
the command line only
Geir,
Not sure at what level of detail you are asking, but we need some
changes in the DRLVM class support code to handle the new
class format. These include the acc_synthetic , acc_annotation etc. access
modifiers, the new attrs like enclosingClass, runtime
visible/invisible attrs,
On 6/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pavel Pervov wrote:
Geir,
What's the first thing we do?
I'd suggest switching the build to 1.5.
The rest will come shortly :)
Now that's a plan! :)
Hi Geir,
Actually what Pavel says makes sense. Not sure what plan we need. We
On 6/26/06, Andrey Chernyshev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good suggestion. I'd also mention that there are some docs in the
DRLVM source tree, e.g. Getting Started [2] and Developer's guide [3]
which contain many useful info. May be it makes sense to post them on
a web site as well:
Good idea.
On 6/26/06, Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have now tried fiddling with Visual Studio C++ Express (free download
for the time being from Microsoft, which would enable me to participate)
to see if I could build classlib with it under Windows XP, but have
failed so far.
I
On 6/26/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used to build classlib successfully on WinXP with completely free
environment, that is MS VS.NET http://vs.net/ 2005 Express, MS Platform
SDK Server 2003 R2
and NASM from Cygwin (there is no free MASM with license which allows OSS
On 6/26/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Odd. It was broken for me too. What changed?
I applied the patch - thanks.
To determine this, one would have to roll back the last commit and retry
the build + smoke tests. And traverse back till we identify what broke it.
We could
Hi Weldon,
These headers live in classlib\deploy\include.
Could it be that your external.dep.CLASSLIB property in make/build.xml is
not set correctly?
Also CLASSLIB_HOME in make/win.properties needs setting.
Thanks,
Rana
On 6/26/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/26/06, Marina
On 6/27/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2006/6/27, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I also read your interesting experiments on the other linked
thread. Microsoft appears to have a new tool mt.exe to embed these
manifests:
mt.exe -manifest someapp.exe.manifest
On 6/28/06, Pavel Afremov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first is used in the second to make required check and the second
used
to check, that there are 256 Kbytes of free stack, before starting
compilation.
So I can add both this functions into open interface and put a patch into
JIRA.
Will
Congratulations :-)
Rana
create_vm() looks quite close/complete to being a complete prototype for
CreateJavaVM,
but I think more work is needed in DestroyVM which prototypes DestroyJavaVM
for functional completeness. It is non waiting on user threads, it does not
send the corresponding JVMTI shutdown events, I also don't
Hi Egor,
Nice benchmark. Yes, the cost of not devirtualizing as well as not hoisting
ldintfcvt is high. I played around a little with this too and have some
comments and questions...
First some high level stuff
1) What are the instructions like ldintfcvt, ldvfnslot, etc.in the jit
dump?
Salikh,
Thanks for this set of fixes. Though I understand that the changes are
described in the zip, would it be possible for you to list/summarize some of
the key changes in the submission on this thread?
Thanks,
Rana
On 7/13/06, Salikh Zakirov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I would like to
Weldon,
Thanks. If jitrino building in debug mode was switched off to not make it
crawl, is it an option to not apply these mods, but just leave this thread
as a reference for people who need this?
I am somehow being able to debug just fine with devenv ( but I don't use
jitrino symbols )
Pavel,
I tried the attached overflow test, and then applied the patch and
retried it. The patch looks good. A couple of comments:
- I could not get the unwind failure that you have mentioned (with
the overflow happening in the first two lines) though I played around with
the test, but
Will do, thanks
On 7/21/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll commit as is - if you need to modify the stack space issue, just
submit a new patch
geir
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
Pavel,
I tried the attached overflow test, and then applied the patch and
retried it. The patch
As I understand it, the value added by a broad check like this before the
compile starts may not be very high. At best, it can try to avoid SOE in
native code with a clean failure when it is certain that the stack state
will not permit completion of the compile. So something like 1/100 of the
On 7/25/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/25/06, Pavel Afremov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I can't reproduce assertion described in HARMONY-971, but it possible
indeed. Alexey is right, lazy exception support for VM code fixes this
and
other similar bugs.
I think I
On 28 Jul 2006 15:35:42 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It reminds me of one usecase, when a 'maybe-commercial' server running
a JVM accepts deployments of JAR files and cannot predict what users
deploy. So, not-to-crash on SOE is a matter of security for the
server. And this is
On 7/24/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I think that VM can do this check but use lower border: e.g. 1/100 of
initial.
JIT must do this check more accurate: use knowledge of algorithms it
uses.
I lowered the defensive VM check to 1/100 of the initial stack size on both
Before tracking detailed EM/JIT profiling information( which we may need at
some point ), it may be useful to initially just track benchmark raw scores
weekly to see overall progress/regression and make it publicly available.
If there are licensing issues with SpecJVM and SpecJBB, we could use a
Hi,
We have commented out all the stack trace handling code etc. in the NT
exception handing code in drlvm to get the same binary image to run on an
old OS like W2K. I am sorry, but I disagree with this approach. We cannot
compile sources meant for XP/W2003 and expect the binaries to run on
I think Oleg has summarized and expressed better many of the things I was
trying to say. A single binary on a least common denominator platform is a
legacy binary. It runs unoptimized on other platforms. Though the term Win
precedes these Microsoft operatig systems, that's a brand. W2K, WinXP
On 8/9/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, it is the question you also pose elsewhere -- can we have a binary
that either (a) uses the lowest common denominator of the different
windows platforms API without incurring an undue penalty performance, or
(b) performs runtime checks and
On 8/9/06, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having different codebases is far worse, this implies separate test
suites, increased complexity of the build system and other bad things.
It would be better to avoid this if possible.
I think that is a price you have decided to pay if you
On 8/9/06, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe [1] will give some additional info.
It is out of the context of DRLVM discussion, but awt uses GDI+
extensively. According to [1] GDI+ is not available on w2k.
[1]
Tim,
Thanks for fixing my quoting. I seem to always mess this up :-)
Please see below for a couple of points...
On 8/9/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But there are degrees to which this is done too right? Somewhere along
the spectrum from a start-up check that chooses between
Hi Mikhail,
As far as I know, SetUnhandledExceptionFilter was introduced as a
backdoor method in in Win2K SP4 to get around the problem that the SEH
handlers are limited to the frame and not process wide. It does handle
problems like NPE and AV, but as you point out, it works by hijacking the
MIkhail,
I have some questions, or just arguments :-) First, though it is nice to
talk of an open helper inlining framework to call VM/GC helpers, isn't the
set of helpers used in JVM's more or less well known and standardized? In
other words, is a framework absolutely necessary, can't the jit
Xiaofeng,
Thanks for the excellent description. My question was not whether partial
inling of helpers( or fastpath inlining ) is necessary. It was more whether
a generalized framework is absolutely necessary to support it. Or whether
there is a finite set of helpers/services fastpaths that one
On 8/16/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/16/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So why can't we optimize native (JNI) calls from Java code using
annotations
similar to those used to annotate helper's slow call above?
Once developer annotates native call with
Xiao Feng,
Yes exactly please see below...
On 8/16/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/17/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adding:
- We will define one or more interfaces for grouping the fastpaths.
These will consist of methods that compatible VM's, GC's
On 8/22/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it also exhibited the same problem on Ubuntu 5 running in Parallels on a
mac.
the tgz can be found here :
http://people.apache.org/~geirm/incubator-harmony-jre-r433739-linux-x86-32-snapshot
.tar.gz
if someone wants to try it on some
On 8/22/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to Geir the snapshot from last week lasted just one minute more
:)
It exception is the same, time is the same, then what is the difference?
I most likely misread. I thought that Geir was saying that with the TM patch
the
Hi Mikhail,
Sorry I left this thread for a while. Are you implementing VMMagic
support in .OPT currently, and prototyping with bump allocation? I am just
trying to understand in what order we are doing this.
Would it be possible to list the fastpath helpers so that the java
interfaces to
Geir,
Good question. The init_stack_info() is really a misnomer. It is an
initialization needed for the overflow exception handling machinery only.
That does not mean that it could not be initialized in a single location
eg., when the vm thread is attached, but it is a somewhat more local
Yes, could you please mark it, as you see best when you apply your changes?
Thanks.
Rana
On 9/8/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok - sounds good. I assume putting in a TODO in the code reminding
ourselves would be reasonable?
geir
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
Geir,
Good question
Thanks Xiao Feng.
Weldon, are you going to put it somewhere like drlvm/trunk/vm/gcv5 if there
are no objections?
Thanks,
Rana
Does this apply to bug fixes as well? For significant fixes that have an
architectural impact, certainly we need to inform the dev list, specially if
there has been some discussion already. But for more local fixes, is it
enough to add a comment to the issue on JIRA, stating current ownership,
It might be OK to disable the event notification on loopback for these
thread/threadgroup java methods only? Would the misses of notification for
such methods in CompiledMethodLoad be a major issue?
Thanks,
Rana
Weldon,
It may be a little early to guard for architectural impact of large parts
of the VM being written in Java? I don't think that we are quite there yet
or need to consciously design to enable this till we have completed the MMTk
integration and done exhaustive perf work.
In addition to
Hi Egor,
An optimization is a functionality that can regress like anything else.
The functionality is the perf gain, which is the point of the optimization.
How would any committer confirm that the submitted code does perform the
optimization ...other than the developer's word that it is
Hi Pavel,
Platform specific optimizations can be accomodated in the scheme
described by doing a cpuid check in the test and automatically passing it or
disabling on all other platforms. That shouldn't be too hard.
I understand that some jit optimizations are deeper and more abstract,
but
On 15 Sep 2006 11:26:40 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote:
This would be the best solution to test if an optimization works as
expected.
We can create the following framework inside Jitrino compiler to test
individual
On 9/19/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi, a new attachment is submitted to GCv5 as an update to JIRA 1428.
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1428), which is a
mark-compaction GC. This GC is going to be connected with last
submission (the trace-forwarding GC) into a
On 9/20/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/20/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/21/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very nice and fast Xiao Feng :-) I read through your first
submission
and
had a couple of thoughts on how this could progress
I am not very familiar with this section of the code. But if this is in
general true, and the classlib dependency on the hythread_XXX api's is
small, what Andrey says above makes sense to me. Why not replace them(
monitor enter/exit, TLS access etc. ) with the portability layer macrodefs
from
I looked at it( gc.LOS hang ) for a while and my findings are somewhat
similar to Alexey's. The problem occurs for me all the time irrespective of
where the trace statement apprears( ref: Weldon's comment ). On breaking in,
the call stack at hang is:
ntdll.dll!7c90eb94()
ntdll.dll!7c90ea53()
Hi Weldon/Geir,
Looks like we have quite a few Windows failures. Could one of you folks
please add in the the new file:
patches/win/APR/threadproc/win32/thread.c
that is in 1457, but possibly got dropped from the commit?
We also need H-1340 to fix the assert in the fat monitor. H-1519 may
Yes, this makes sense. In that case, my vote would be to apply Atrem's patch
new_queued_cond_var.patch in H-1519. Let's run with this and the new
thread.c( that we have already applied from H-1457 ) for a while. If we
discover no new issues, we can go chat about them on the APR list?
Thanks,
+1
And the JIRA has logging properties as well. On several threads now, email
patches have just caused more confusion, with participants asking if these
are examples or live code.
On 10/4/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do not like JIRA too, but sending patches by email is
MIkhail,
Are you going to keep these files ( sln and projects ) updated, since
they are now becoming a part of the main codebase?
Thx,
Rana
On 10/4/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir,
I created this package to have a common place with other MSVC users in
JIRA
and I did
On 10/6/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A major design concept in this revision that was not made very clear
in previous submissions is space. GC is a concept of a full (or
standalone) garbage collector design. One GC can have multiple spaces,
each of which can employ different
On 10/6/06, Pavel Ozhdikhin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we agree on common testing configs we can make sure the Harmony
will be stable on at least this set of configurations. This does not
mean we won't fix problems on other configurations. The goal is to
gain and maintain general stability.
Makes sense, using a standard barrier invocation fastpath. But I assume that
the MMTk WB helper that it will call needs to be inlined too.
Thanks
On 10/10/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weldon,
I thought about slightly different approach.
Why not to write fast-path VM helper
Hi,
There is incomplete support for IPF platforms in the DRLVM codebase, as
many may have seen. It would be nice to complete it. There are a couple of
issues on how to start this. IPF specific changes are likely to be quite
significant, including changes in the JIT, garbage collector(s),
I think that over time, we will start seeing IPF specific code files
appearing ... eg., quite a different jit, IPFhelpers.cpp,
IPFexception_filters.cpp, IPFnativestack.cpp, IPFprofiledrivers.cpp etc.
That is my impression of how most IPF ports go. Even in the main codebase
they will virtually
My indentation is messed up, but it's too late to correct it..
On 10/12/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/12/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
3) The problem: Is the signature for gc_alloc method : gc_alloc(int
objSize,
int allocationHandle) is universal for all
On 10/13/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is just one more argument for doing IPF porting in a separate
branch,
at least since some point.
I admit that maintaining quality and checking for regressions on new
platforms is a separate big problem but I believe we
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're a volunteer project, so supported is based on interest in
community. Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.
I think we can define support as - one or more people in the
On 10/16/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 00:01 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I tried to put some back. StackTest still doesn't work. It's hard to
believe... so I gave up and just kept going :)
I wonder if the test or the implementation are wrong.
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So since I don't have Win 2003, I gotta just commit and let someone else
test?
Any committer have win 2003?
I think that it may be hard to find a test at this point that fails on
Windows Server 2003, but passes on XP. But perf etc.
Hi,
Is there any known bug related to this issue?
Rana
On 10/15/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After thinking about it a while, how about the following course of
action:
1)
First phase is to modify hysem_wait() and any other hy blocking
functions to test if, in
This is a good document, thanks Svetlana. Even if a lot of custom gc's don't
get written, it helps in understanding the current collecor farmework and
how it plugs into DRLVM.
Rana
On 10/16/06, Konovalova, Svetlana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Folks,
I took a close look at Hot to Write GC
Hi Gregory,
It is a good idea to put up a live list, thanks. Here are some
suggestions on the contents for development items in the VM/JIT. A few may
be almost done. We can fine tune...and add other work items as well
JIT Items
==
- GC related: WB support in Jitrino.opt
Implement
Mikhail,
Makes sense. BTW, we need to change the IA-64 to IPF( IA-64 is not an
external term ) on any posted list. IA32 to x86-32 bit and Intel 64 to
x86-64 bit. Sorry for the typo's.
Rana
On 10/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
Rana,
the JIT
Mikhail,
All this looks reasonable to me. At least to go ahead. Regarding 2A,
could the jit cache this information for re-use?
Alternatively, the JIT can do all this at startup...by going thru the
contract class of fastpath java methods and querying the component manager
for the native
discussed on the JIRA. The Stacktest and all other stack related tests now
pass.
I'll submit the patch against 1786 in the next few hours after running
acceptance tests.
Rana
On 10/16/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/16/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
On 10/17/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/18/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pavel's looks like more flexible, but I have a question with the
special interface approach: is it possible that sometimes we want to
call a library native method in fast way? If
Alex,
Thanks for the information about Intel64 conventions for long mode. I
spoke losely and inaccurately below. I am the collector of the
development items, not the originator of all items :-) It may be a good
idea to write a short document describing the calling conventions we support
on
I added the VM dev tasks to
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/CoreVmDevelopmentItems
off Gregory's currently empty page. Please change as necessary.
Rana
On 18 Oct 2006 20:11:14 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
now this is done:
Gregory had already created an entry on the front page ( see his comments
above ).
On 19 Oct 2006 10:55:43 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x207 day of Apache Harmony Rana Dasgupta wrote:
I added the VM dev tasks to
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/CoreVmDevelopmentItems
About 1916,
This is a Widows debugheap overrun issue in the awt code( don't know when
this was introduced ). The debug heap marks all allocations with a FD FD FD
FD before and after the allocation. During free() it checks to see is that
guardarea has been trampled on. If so, it complains with a
On 20 Oct 2006 19:15:46 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To sum up my thoughts:
* debugging_VM_and_JIT
+ is outdated
+ covers both linux and windows debugging tips intermixed
+ has instructions for JET tracing (quite valid)
* Let's make make it 2 separate docs: Linux debugging and
I thought that we are doing IPF first with the interpreter?
Rana
Hi Weldon,
I am sorry to to see that you may be still having problems with the
VS.Net debugger. I use it all the time, and everything( BP's, watch, memory
and thread windows ) works as expected. If you haven't done so alread, could
you please give this a shot?
devenv /debugexe
+1
On 10/20/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But you are right, the dependencies graph of all VM internal headers is
a huge
tangle which should be untangled somehow. Hopefully the Class.h cleanup
which
Pavel is doing now will make a first step in the right direction.
Is this
On 10/25/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
any comments? any at all?
Geir,
Sorry about my confusion. Is this synonymous with or a part of the
process of applying to Apache to graduate us from incubator status?
Thanks,
Rana
I see, thanks. The TLP proposal looks good to me.
Rana
On 10/25/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rana Dasgupta wrote:
On 10/25/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
any comments? any at all?
Geir,
Sorry about
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
