Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you want to go back to a frame pointer style of register stack > access, that's doable, but that's the way it was in the beginning and > the performance penalties in normal code outweighed the savings in > stack pushes.
JITted memory access through the frame pointer is as fast as with absolute memory addresses. The same is likely true for gcc/CGP core, when we force the frame pointer being a CPU register. > If you want to try it again to see if things are different I don't > care, so long as the semantics expressed to the bytecode programs > don't change. It will invalidate all the current JIT code on all the > platforms so it's a not-insignificant thing to do. That's the problem, yes. > ... I also don't think > we've sufficient real code to judge performance, so I think it's a > bit premature to worry about it. This is of course true, the more for changing it in the first place :) What about issues with JIT and prederefed cores and multi-threading: currently we need to "recompile" all bytecode per thread. leo
