As a MIPS guy who beat his head against the wall of the broken JIT3 a couple of years ago, I'm really interested in this, and I'm really concerned that I never saw the original message from Makolaj to which the message below is a reply, though I did see Timothy's message explaining how to manually run the tests. We have a spam filter in place, but it doesn't delete messages, only tags them as spam, so that's not the cause. Has anyone else noticed a problem with the kaffe.org mail relay lately?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mikolaj Habryn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Timothy Stack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 16:55 Subject: [kaffe] Re: mipsel/jit3 regression test results > > > > On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 11:11, Timothy Stack wrote: > > > To run it manually, you need to do something like the following in > > > sh/bash: > > [..snip..] > > > > Magic, thanks! > > Excellent! > > > Results are: > > > > Bombed with Illegal Instruction: ControlFlowMethods, ObjectFields, > > PrimitiveArrays, StaticFields, StaticMethodCall, TypeConversion > > > > Passed: ConstMathMethods, ConstMethods, ParameterizedBitwiseMethods, > > ParameterizedLogicalMethods > > > > Aborted: ParameterizedMathMethods, ParameterizedMethods > > > > ...and I got bored waiting for MethodOptimizations to complete. > > So, first, I guess I never explained what the purpose of these are... > These tests are basically the baby steps used to test a primordial jitter. > Just running something like 'Hello, World!' in java requires almost a > fully working jitter, so, these tests are for individual operations like > returning constant values, doing simple math, etc... > > With that out of the way, the aborted tests are probably due to floating > point use, bad trampolines, and/or a bad sysdep_callmethod. The illegal > instructions are probably bad code or its generating instructions that > aren't supported on your processor. Unfortunately, I don't have a sense > why MethodOptimizations would loop... > > If you want to start fixing things, you'll want to try to get xdebugging > working (see FAQ.xdebugging) so you can use gdb to disassemble/set > breakpoints on the generated code. > > > That was without libffi. With libffi, the differences were: > > > > ConstMethods failed instead of passed. > > ParameterizedMethods failed instead of aborted. > > StaticMethodCall crashed the box :) > > Um, well, that isn't good... ;) You might as well avoid libffi for now > and try to fix it after the rest of the jitter is working. > > > m. > > good luck! > > tim stack > > _______________________________________________ > kaffe mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe > _______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
