https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324134
User [EMAIL PROTECTED] added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324134#c12 --- Comment #12 from Andreas Färber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-05-12 08:56:31 MST --- Geoff, 1. This was something to try out Zoltan suggested in the beginning. It didn't help - not defining some of those led to compilation failure and others did not improve things. It can go away. 5. Moving CODE_LENGTH to the top is a bad idea, since it is a local number. If you have a better idea, please tell me. I won't remove the signedness changes from my working copy, because doing so crowds the compilation output with unnecessary warnings I need to review at compilation time. Rather let's get them committed first. I have already reverted some brackets from the macros for patch readability, which "should" actually be in, to avoid generation of illegal or unexpected instructions. (updated patch to follow) I still do not see extra registers there, it should be storing the exact same registers, just double-word width. It's replacing the store-multiple instruction I mentioned earlier that has no ppc64 equivalent. Since its use makes the ppc(32) code short and works there, I do not think we should bloat the ppc(32) code just to be consistent, no? (If I'm overlooking something there, please be explicit which registers it's storing differently so that I can fix it. I modelled this from ppc(32) code for floating point registers iirc.) Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
