On 07/03/14 10:07, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I've just built Racket for Linux on MIPS without problem, so I don't
think it's a misaligned access.
Thanks for take a look to the problem :)
Be aware linux has code in the kernel to fix misaligned access to
memory. You can disable this behaviour in mips64 following this guide
http://www.linux-mips.org/wiki/Alignment (or arm
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/arm/mem_alignment).
Maybe the problem is in some of the code inside of some C macro related
to OpenBSD.
I tried Linux because I found QEMU images that made it relatively
convenient to try:
http://people.debian.org/~aurel32/qemu/mipsel/
I've compiled racket in qemu with that image and with the workarounds
mentioned above disabled. Racket builds without problem. The same with
linux/armv7.
If you can point me to similar images for OpenBSD, I'd be happy to take
a closer look.
I've been trying during the last days to run OpenBSD mips64/mips64el
with qemu but I failed. I will try with other architectures.
At Wed, 18 Jun 2014 04:33:46 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
Sorry for revive an old thread but recently an OpenBSD developer
(jturner) has been testing racket on mips64el (loonsong).
He sees a SIGBUS at the same point. GDB doesn't show a backtrace.
Maybe the interpreter is performing a misaligned access to the memory at
some point and the problem is not only related to the growing direction
of the stack. It can even hurt slightly the performance on other platforms.
HPPA and MIPS64 only permit aligned access to memory, however amd64, arm
(almost always) and x86 doesn't have this problem.
On 04/30/14 15:49, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
On 04/30/14 02:07, Matthew Flatt wrote:
It's been a very long time since I touched a machine where the stack
grows up. Does changing `c->cont->buf.stack_size` to `c->stack_size`
work?
I'm not sure:
mkdir xsrc
make xsrc/precomp.h
env XFORM_PRECOMP=yes ../racketcgc -cqu
/usr/ports/pobj/racket-6.0-debug/racket-6.0/src/racket/gc2/xform.rkt
--setup . --cpp "cc -E -I./..
-I/usr/ports/pobj/racket-6.0-debug/racket-6.0/src/racket/gc2/../include
-I/usr/local/include -I/usr/X11R6/include -pthread -I/usr/local/include
-DMZ_USES_SHARED_LIB " --keep-lines -o xsrc/precomp.h
/usr/ports/pobj/racket-6.0-debug/racket-6.0/src/racket/gc2/precomp.c
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
The output of gdb:
http://juanfra.info/bl/racket-2014/backtrace-racket-6.0.log
At Wed, 30 Apr 2014 00:21:10 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado wrote:
On 04/28/14 21:13, Matthew Flatt wrote:
Sorry --- I now see that `--enable-pthread` is forced for OpenBSD. I
think it should be on by default, but not actually forced, so I've made
that repair.
More to the point, I've pushed a repair so that CAS is attempted only
when futures or places are enabled.
I've compiled racket 6.0 with both patches. Now I see another
(unrelated) problem:
setjmpup.c: In function 'scheme_uncopy_stack'
setjmpup.c:358: error: 'struct Scheme_Cont' has no member named 'buf'
http://juanfra.info/bl/racket-2014/racket-6.0-3.log
At Mon, 28 Apr 2014 20:45:35 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
wrote:
On 04/28/14 20:08, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I think `--enable-pthread` is triggering the attempt to use CAS. Can
you leave that one out?
I tried without enable-pthread. I see the same problem
http://juanfra.info/bl/racket-2014/racket-6.0-2.log
At Mon, 28 Apr 2014 19:59:10 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero Hurtado
wrote:
On 04/28/14 01:03, Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Mon, 28 Apr 2014 00:58:48 +0200, Juan Francisco Cantero
Hurtado wrote:
I'm trying to compile Racket 6.0 on OpenBSD/hppa but the
compilation
fails because there is not support for CAS on OpenBSD/hppa. Is it
possible compile racket on platforms without atomic CAS?.
Does it help to use
--disable-places --disable-futures
as arguments to `configure`?
No, I use always both arguments because we don't have support for
tls on
OpenBSD. Here is the log of the build:
http://juanfra.info/bl/racket-2014/racket-6.0.log
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
