latest pr323 patch for ARM
rob at senecass.com
Mon Aug 16 19:12:11 PDT 2010
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
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
-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 -
More information about the zero-dev