Weldon,
Warning: unknown flag - jet::wb4j
This warning means that the code for 'wb4j' switch processing is
not on its place.
Either the patch failed to apply, or jitrino.dll was not rebuild
properly.
Will rebuild help ? E.g. to remove
build\win_ia32_msvc_debug\semis\vm\jitrino
and then run
On 7/10/06, Alex Astapchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weldon,
I just commited http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-816
into JIRA.
It contains the changes for Jitrino.JET:
- magics support for MMTk
- write barriers for Java for MMTk
- a simple test to check the things are alive
I
Weldon Washburn wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One question, why do we need write barriers for 'putstatic'
bytecode?
This fields appear in root set and does
Weldon Washburn wrote:
On 7/10/06, Alex Astapchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Weldon,
I just commited http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-816
into JIRA.
Thanks. I will look at it today.
It contains the changes for Jitrino.JET:
- magics support for MMTk
- write barriers for Java
Weldon,
I just commited http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-816
into JIRA.
It contains the changes for Jitrino.JET:
- magics support for MMTk
- write barriers for Java for MMTk
- a simple test to check the things are alive
I also have few questions on unboxed package and some MMTk
One question, why do we need write barriers for 'putstatic' bytecode?
This fields appear in root set and does not represent heap to heap
references. There is no need to add write barriers to this entities.
This is good that the patch doesn't conflict with HARMONY-581. I can
continue my
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One question, why do we need write barriers for 'putstatic' bytecode?
This fields appear in root set and does not represent heap to heap
references. There is no need to add write barriers to this entities.
Good question. The short answer is
On 7/10/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One question, why do we need write barriers for 'putstatic' bytecode?
This fields appear in root set and does not represent heap to heap
references. There is no need to add write barriers
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/10/06, Ivan Volosyuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One question, why do we need write barriers for 'putstatic' bytecode?
This fields appear in root set and does not represent heap to heap
