harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pavel Ozhdikhin" <pavel.ozhdik...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Winx86 platform support
Date Fri, 01 Dec 2006 06:19:32 GMT
Rana,

I think now it's just a right time to start this work. It would be good if
you do preliminary examination of which areas need to be fixed for 64 bit
Windows in VM/JIT. I don't think there will be many problems eith enabling
on the JIT side - so far optimizations which do not work on EM64 (for
example those requiring fs:14 for TLS access) are turned off there.

Thanks,
Pavel


On 11/30/06, Rana Dasgupta <rdasgupt@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This port would be really good to have, but not urgent. Obviously, the
> biggest change is in the JIT. At the moment, I think that we should focus
> on
> stabilizing and performing on the 3 major platforms we are functional on.
> The IPF port is also in progress. However, with the Vista releases early
> next year? ( 32 and 64 bits ), 64 bit Windows will be a major platform and
> we will need to be on it. I am going to start going thru DRLVM to identify
> functional areas and implementation that need to change, play around with
> the Microsoft 64 bit toolsets( ML64 assembler, CL, LINK, Visual Studio 64
> bit ) etc. and start putting together a Windows64 porting guide on the
> Wiki.
> Or is it too early to do this?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> On 11/29/06, Rana Dasgupta <rdasgupt@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > In 32 bit mode or 64 bit mode? We are not ported/functional yet on 64
> bit
> > Windows for exception handling, JIT etc. No [fs:14] for TLS access,
> windows
> > handles are 8 bytes, all the inline asm{} needs to go away, most data
> types
> > are different...More changes than Linux 32 -> Linux 64. I would think
> that
> > the work involved would be somewhat similar to an IPF port. Certainly
> worth
> > doing though.
> >
> > On 11/29/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > we do want to support this platform, but need an installed 64bit
> windows
> > > machine to work on - or at least someone to have it and give us
> > > feedback.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tim Ellison wrote:
> > > > Alexey Varlamov wrote:
> > > >> BTW, are we interested in supporting Windows on x86_64? It is
> listed
> > > >> on [1] but seems nobody really tests.
> > > >
> > > > Yes!  Do you have a machine to contribute to the build/test?  I'm up
> > > for
> > > > helping to fix problems.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message