Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Wookey
+++ Adhemerval Zanella [2016-04-28 12:07 -0300]: > I do not think this issue is inherent to all JIT implements, but rather to > luajit with its NaN-tagging scheme [1] which packs different types of objects > in a 8-byte. Other jits use the same/similar schemes (mozilla's ionmonkey is one AIUI). N

Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Steve Capper
On 28 April 2016 at 14:24, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 28 April 2016 at 14:17, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> One simple (from the kernel's perspective, not from the JIT) approach >> might be to always use MAP_FIXED whenever an allocation is made for >> memory that needs these special pointers, and then m

Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Adhemerval Zanella
I do not think this issue is inherent to all JIT implements, but rather to luajit with its NaN-tagging scheme [1] which packs different types of objects in a 8-byte. It works well with x86_64 that limits the VMA to 47-bits, but things get messy with large VMA support. Luajit work around this issue

The Linaro 16.04 release is now available for download!

2016-04-28 Thread Koen Kooi
Digital circuits are made from analog parts. -- Don Vonada The Linaro 16.04 release is now available for download! Both LSK and LNG tarball releases have been discontinued this cycle and the preferred way of procuring a release is through git.linaro.org. Using the Android-based i

Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Edward Nevill
FWIW: OpenJDK assumes 48 bit virtual address. There is no inherent reason for this other than we do movz/movk/movk to form an address. It is relatively trivial to change this to movz/movk/movk/movk All the best, Ed. On 28 April 2016 at 14:00, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > This is a summary of dis

Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Peter Maydell
On 28 April 2016 at 14:17, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > One simple (from the kernel's perspective, not from the JIT) approach > might be to always use MAP_FIXED whenever an allocation is made for > memory that needs these special pointers, and then manage the available > address space explicitly. Would

Re: JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Thursday 28 April 2016 16:00:22 Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > This is a summary of discussions we had on IRC between kernel and toolchain > engineers regarding support for JITs and 52-bit virtual address space (mostly > in the context of LuaJIT, but this concerns other JITs too). > > The summary is

JITs and 52-bit VA

2016-04-28 Thread Maxim Kuvyrkov
This is a summary of discussions we had on IRC between kernel and toolchain engineers regarding support for JITs and 52-bit virtual address space (mostly in the context of LuaJIT, but this concerns other JITs too). The summary is that we need to consider ways of reducing the size of VA for a gi