https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324134
User [EMAIL PROTECTED] added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=324134#c41 --- Comment #41 from Andreas Färber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-26 03:33:59 MDT --- Concerning the state of the patchset and its testability, it has suffered a little under the Linear IR introduction - we were in a debugging stage before (yes, for the JIT, not the interpreter), now first code handling the new long opcodes needs to be added before we get there again (assertion failures for unhandled opcodes at bootstrap). Some guidance on how to best handle the varying code sizes in mini would be helpful, too. Geoff didn't like my local code size defines but didn't come up with a better suggestion. Such things could be decided and committed for ppc(32) before any of the ppc64 stuff to gradually reduce the ppc64 patch size. I recently had some doubts about my ppc_ld/ppc_std macros: The intructions require word-aligned addresses and don't store the two trailing zero bits. Currently, my macros accept the value to be serialized, requiring <<2 in lots of places in mini. I would propose that I change my macro to accept the real value, optionally assert its alignment, and do a mask there. What do you think? Regarding the atomic builtins, I understood Olaf in such a way that those were generic helpers introduced by GCC 4.1+ and not specific to ppc(64). If that were correct, it might relieve the Mono team of adding and maintaining atomic functions for newer platforms. Just as a clarification of my reasons to apply his patch to my ppc64 branch, orthogonal to my own changes. -- 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
