How much work would be involved in having ARM and IA32 assemblers match when relocation info is generated?
-Ivan http://codereview.chromium.org/14170/diff/1/9 File src/assembler-ia32.cc (right): http://codereview.chromium.org/14170/diff/1/9#newcode1993 Line 1993: ASSERT(pos != RelocInfo::kNoPosition); ARM also has a peephole optimizer so it should mirror what we do for IA32. We have just not investigated the code quality as much at this point. 2008/12/17 08:20:26, Søren Gjesse wrote: > On 2008/12/17 07:45:35, Mads Ager wrote: > > In the ARM code, RecordPosition and RecordStatementPosition called > > WriteRecordedPositions. Why is that not needed here (or is it not needed on > > ARM)? > > The reason for this it that on Intel we postpone the actual writing to the > relocation information until the point where there can actually be a debug > break. Currently it means that the positions are written whenever either a call > instruction is written or when the JavaScript return relocation information > record is written. The reason for postponing it on Intel was to make the > peephole optimizer more efficient as it could not eliminate instructions which > har relocation information attached to them. http://codereview.chromium.org/14170 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
