From dev-return-25664-apmail-harmony-dev-archive=harmony.apache.org@harmony.apache.org Wed Apr 04 18:32:49 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 3922 invoked from network); 4 Apr 2007 18:32:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Apr 2007 18:32:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 20168 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2007 18:32:46 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 20135 invoked by uid 500); 4 Apr 2007 18:32:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 20117 invoked by uid 99); 4 Apr 2007 18:32:46 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:32:46 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gshimansky@gmail.com designates 209.85.134.187 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.134.187] (HELO mu-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.134.187) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:32:37 -0700 Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id w1so419988mue for ; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:32:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=FtLf/WD0HCZAWOB30timl2zs1HIHMLKYb2SvIo/LGnks9RYpVhxcSTB3MD6fZAOssBE3CveHcMAD9P/0/vqeXPdf5R4Bs/Jz7GpXT8977jeglRwV5CdLBBprb65VZgsB9IbyL+wgesW2XhzI0PuIEEqiPOnkOn46WvB3LGRSXbk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=VY0snWH0AViko8/A7D+lhmui7u38+OWLZvdXVwEgLzi4SoiAySDSXljFTeG/FqOa8WbgaUHSXsFe1aHqVJtYngmzVSpLvX25AiW7De3lCkjZGNuNNwG/zcBct1SLR49TPSiyFp/Be6UQLIN2wOpjFiupRn8eEdoc5UqDaSgs9ts= Received: by 10.82.104.18 with SMTP id b18mr1261835buc.1175711535967; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:32:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from desktop ( [91.76.77.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id z34sm1896584ikz.2007.04.04.11.32.14; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:32:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Gregory Shimansky To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [drlvm] tests failing on Win2000 PIII Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 22:32:13 +0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <3b3f27c60702251200y5c0b1c34t2472034ea4f0fff6@mail.gmail.com> <200704042114.18988.gshimansky@gmail.com> <51d555c70704041051g442f8d0bq2a308b29fd7ce9@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51d555c70704041051g442f8d0bq2a308b29fd7ce9@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704042232.13173.gshimansky@gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wednesday 04 April 2007 21:51 Rana Dasgupta wrote: > On 4/4/07, Gregory Shimansky wrote: > > On Friday 02 March 2007 21:56 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > > I thought it used to work. Also, I thought that someone had shown > > > that Win2k was still widely deployed. maybe that's win2k+3? (I can > > > never keep the windows platform family straight anymore...) > > > > Resurrecting this old thread about w2k, Nathan, what happens if you just > > comment out the line with AddVectoredExceptionHandler? In this case > > you'll lose a handler registration, so you will not have hardware NPEs (I > > am not sure about the JIT status for ia32, are hardware NPEs enabled for > > this architecture?), > > Also SOE, unless the implementation has changed...? Yes of course. I was thinking about simple applications which don't normally cause SOE. > >you won't have JVMTI breakpoints in JIT mode, so debugging > > won't work. But the rest of VM should work on w2k with the exception of > > the code which uses P4 specific instructions. > > > > If this helps to at least start running the VM, I think it could be > > possible to move from vectored exceptions to older structured ones on w2k > > and make it a supported platform. > > > > If you get illegal instruction like mfence on w2k as well, probably the > > modifications which Evgueni Brevnov is going to offer for P3 backport on > > Linux could help you running at least something... > > > > I am asking because I don't have either w2k or P3 processor, so all I can > > do to help right now is give some suggestions. > > > > Gregory -- Gregory