> On 08 Jan 2015, at 07:02, Eliot Miranda <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Max,
> 
> 
> On Jan 7, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Max Leske <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>> Just to be sure: is the size of the header stil 32 bits? Or is it now 64 
>> bits? Or is it 32 bits for now and will then become 64 bits? If it will 
>> become 64 bits anyway, we might aswell store 64 bits right away. That way we 
>> won’t have to make another change later on.
> 
> The method header is 32-bits;it's a SmallInteger.  In the 64-bit VMs 
> (standard and Spur) it is a 64-but integer but only 32-bits are used.  If we 
> were to use more bits then it would be very difficult to serialize and 
> deserialize code between 64- & 32-bit images; it would require a recompile.  
> Also the VMs would be a bit different and the image code for the compiler 
> etc.  so basically it's not going to happen.  It breaks too many things.

I see. So I’ll use a 32 bit signed int representation.

Thanks

> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Max
> 
> Eliot (phone)
> 
>> 
>>> On 07 Jan 2015, at 22:27, Max Leske <[email protected] 
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Clément
>>> 
>>>> On 30 Dec 2014, at 12:36, Clément Bera <[email protected] 
>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hello,
>>>> 
>>>> As some of you may know, Pharo is being enhanced with support for multiple 
>>>> bytecode sets. This will allow to run at the same time compiled methods 
>>>> with 2 different bytecode sets for experimentation and to add easily the 
>>>> new bytecode set described in this ESUG paper 
>>>> <http://esug.org/data/ESUG2014/IWST/Papers/iwst2014_A%20bytecode%20set%20for%20adaptive%20optimizations.pdf>.
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> The virtual machine knows which bytecode set the compiled method uses for 
>>>> its encoding based on the sign of its header. This means that on the 
>>>> contrary to right now, a compiled method *can* have a negative header.
>>>> 
>>>> The issue is that typically operations such as #bitAnd: or #+ to access 
>>>> bits of the smallinteger does not work the same way on negative integers 
>>>> (2 complement's implementation of integers), resulting in incorrect 
>>>> values. I am fixing the problematic cases in Pharo. 
>>>> 
>>>> One case is in Fuel and I can't fix it myself. It's in:
>>>> 
>>>> FLCompiledMethodCluster>>#serializeInstance: aCompiledMethodToSerialize 
>>>> with: anEncoder
>>>> 
>>>> "some code"
>>>> header := aCompiledMethod header.
>>>> "some code"
>>>> anEncoder encodeUint32: header
>>>> "some code"
>>>> 
>>>> This looks problematic because now header is not a uint anymore but a sint.
>>>> In addition, #encodeUint32: uses #bitAnd: which may work differently on 
>>>> negative integers.
>>>> 
>>>> What do you fuel experts think ? Is there anything to fix there ?
>>> 
>>> Replacing the header serialization with #encodeInt32: should fix the 
>>> problem. 
>>> 
>>> Every header will from now on be an sint, is that correct?
>>> 
>>> I’ll make the change and integrate.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Max
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Best,
>>>> 
>>>> Clement
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-fuel mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-fuel 
> <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-fuel>

Reply via email to