[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-zero-dev
Subject:    latest pr323 patch for ARM
From:       rob () senecass ! com (Rob Savoye)
Date:       2010-08-17 2:12:11
Message-ID: 4C69EFFB.2070309 () senecass ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 08/16/10 03:15, Gary Benson wrote:

> are wrong, I think.  To clear the frame pointer, you set
> last_Java_*sp* to zero.  So that should have been left as is.
> If last_Java_sp is zero then the frame pointer is cleared and
> the value of last_Java_fp is never read.
> 
> By the way, it's worth trying this with a debug build, so that
> assertions are on.

I reverted bytecodes_arm.def, as all the changes I made in that file
were like this example. (setting the FP instead of the SP to 0). But if
SP is being set to a non 0 value, then I left the other changes alone.
Those follow the sequence of setting SP to 0, then set FP to the top
Zero frame, and SP to the top of the stack. (THREAD_JAVA_SP)

I have a newer patch with these changes incorporated at:
http://www.senecass.com/projects/OpenJDK-ARM/thumb2-081610.patch. I used
"hg log -p -r", which I hope is ok. I'm slowly learning how to use
mercurial.

Right now, even with this patch it still segfaults here:
	do_aload_0 () at ./bytecodes_arm.s:419

Which it did before and after this patch is applied.

Looking at the contrib/mixtec-hacks.patch, I see this patch to
openjdk/hotspot/make/linux/makefiles/product.make:

-SYSDEFS += -DPRODUCT
-VERSION = optimized
+SYSDEFS += -DASSERT
+VERSION = mixtec

Which I assume will do the trick. I'll enable that and do a rebuild tonight.

	- rob -

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]