Re: [Mono-dev] Possible bugs in tramp-amd64.c when addresses span 4Gb boundary

On 24/09/2014 10:34 am, Ben Carter wrote: On 24/09/2014 02:22 am, Zoltan Varga wrote: Hi, Mono tries to allocate all its code into the lower 32 bit part of the address space (see MAP_32BIT in mono-codeman.c). What platform is this ? Ah, that might well explain it - this is on Windows

[Mono-dev] Possible bugs in tramp-amd64.c when addresses span 4Gb boundary

missing about how trampolines operate that means that offsets of this nature shouldn't occur in the first place? Thanks for any ideas or advice! -- Ben Carter - b...@saillune.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http

Re: [Mono-dev] Possible bugs in tramp-amd64.c when addresses span 4Gb boundary

to perform an equivalent limiting of the allocated address ranges. This is starting to make sense now... Thanks! -- Ben Carter - b...@saillune.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo

[Mono-dev] Mono on PowerPC-64

out the problem? Many thanks in advance! -- Ben Carter - b...@saillune.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

[Mono-dev] Best practices for porting Mono, and a couple of questions

on these or indeed advice on porting strategy in general would be very gratefully received - many thanks in advance! -- Ben Carter - b...@saillune.net ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono