Hi, 2008/3/13, Oliver Deakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Jimmy/Alexei, > > Im starting to look at implementing shared memory transport for jdwp. > It's very early days at the moment, but I have been able to open the > shared memory space (created by the RI running as server) and read some > data from it. I have also been able to mirror this behaviour, with > Harmony running in server mode. I will start to check in some changes > soon, initially for the build system to start building dt_shmem.dll on > Windows. After that I will start checking in some of my code and add > some changes to the jpda test setup so it can run the tests in shared > memory mode. >
Really cool ! BTW, do you need to modify the build file or some common header file of JWDP Oliver? I'm merging currect JDWP with Harmony Portlib and nearly get finished (expect for a minor problem that portlib is lack of useful select and process APIs as we already know when working on NIO), and I may need to changing makefile and some SocketTransport and TransportManager implementation. Please let me know if you also need to modify such files so that we may not meet conflict. :) > Regards, > Oliver > > Jimmy,Jing Lv wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 2008/2/22, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> Jimmy, > >> > >> I fully support your idea, but cannot follow the discussion fully. The > >> old thread mostly discussed a shared memory protocol, didn't it? This > >> thread no longer mentions a shared memory, but discusses an API update > >> instead. May be all these things are parts of the whole picture, but > >> the picture slips out of my mind. I would suggest being merciful to my > >> google-weakened brain and write some justifications of the decision > >> taken. > >> > >> > > > > Yes, I never forget shared memory, but it seems we need more > > information of that (according to the conclusion of last discussion). > > However java6 updating is easier to work on and we've got all > > information on java spec, as a result, IMO, we'd better start from the > > easy beginning, and leave hard work alone until we find some other way > > to resolve it, do you think so? :) (Maybe someone already has a plan > > on it :) > > BTW, as today is friday, have a nice weekend :) > > > > > >> For example, I believe Mikhail L. justification: "I don't think that > >> time and efforts are an issue. The time flies when you are having fun > >> :)" is quite explanatory. Or you may come up with something more > >> rational. > >> > >> Thanks. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:30 AM, Jimmy,Jing Lv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > Hi All, > >> > > >> > As discussed before, we can start JDWP updating and improving. > >> > IMHO, let's start from the easiest way, updating to java 6. > >> > My proposal is: > >> > 1. Setup a branch of JDKTools for java6 in harmony repository > >> > 2. add/improve JDWP functions into java6 level. As the main updating > >> > for java6 JDWP is about JDWP-protocol, it seems no much effect on VM > >> > and debugger. > >> > > >> > As M5 freeze will be done at the end of this week, may start > >> > from next week on. Any comments/suggestions/Volunteers? Thanks! > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > Best Regards! > >> > > >> > Jimmy, Jing Lv > >> > China Software Development Lab, IBM > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> With best regards, > >> > >> Alexei > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > Oliver Deakin > Unless stated otherwise above: > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > 741598. > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU > > -- Best Regards! Jimmy, Jing Lv China Software Development Lab, IBM
