http://codereview.chromium.org/10818026/diff/3002/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc
File src/arm/assembler-arm.cc (right):
http://codereview.chromium.org/10818026/diff/3002/src/arm/assembler-arm.cc#newcode132
src/arm/assembler-arm.cc:132: ASSERT(!IsSupported(VFP3) ||
(IsSupported(VFP2)
&&
IsSupported(ARMv7)));
On 2012/07/25 10:59:54, Rodolph Perfetta wrote:
> It is possible to have an ARMv7 core without VFP and in this case the
assert
> would fail. It is an uncommon configuration though.
This only tests that VFP3 -> (VFP2 && ARMv7)
if ARMv7 is supported and VFP3 is not, then the assert still passes.
You are right, my mistake.
http://codereview.chromium.org/10818026/diff/3002/src/platform-linux.cc#newcode136
src/platform-linux.cc:136: search_string = "vfp";
On 2012/07/25 10:59:54, Rodolph Perfetta wrote:
> this will match the vfpv3 string since when they differ the
search_string
will
> have reach '\0'.
>
> Maybe put "vfp "
since VFP3 implies VFP2, wouldn't this be fine? I'm concerned that if the
cpuinfo string happens to end with "vfp", "vfp " wouldn't match.
Yes you are right this would be fine.
http://codereview.chromium.org/10818026/
--
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
