On Oct 16, 2004, at 12:26 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Jeff Clites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
... But, we use this currently, because
there is one issue with threads: With a thread, you don't start from
the "beginning" of the JITted code segment,
This isn't a threading issue. We can always start exec
oolong:~/research/parrot/include/parrot coke$ uname -a
Darwin oolong 7.5.0 Darwin Kernel Version 7.5.0: Thu Aug 5 19:26:16 PDT 2004;
root:xnu/xnu-517.7.21.obj~3/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
perl is "v5.8.1-RC3"
All tests successful, 4 tests and 52 subtests skipped.
Files=122, Tests=1943,
Sam Ruby wrote:
[ PMC method inheritance ]
Patch attached.
Thanks, applied.
leo
Christian Jaeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello
> I'm using Linux/x86 with the Grsecurity.org patch applied, which is
> enforcing page execution permissions (PAX) unless you turn them off
> on a binary using the "chpax" userspace tool.
[ ... ]
> The correct solution would be to mark the resp
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It still doesn't make sense to me. Try adding the following line to
both fixedpmcarray.pmc and perlint.pmc:
METHOD INTVAL inheritme() { return 42; }
Ok, that's exactly that part, which currently *is* broken. If you have
some time please
Jeff Clites wrote:
We do still re-JIT for each thread on PPC, though we wouldn't have to
The real problem that all JIT architectures still have is a different
one: its called const_table and hidden either in the CONST macro or in
syntax like NUM_CONST, which is translated by the jit2h.pl utility
Hello
I'm using Linux/x86 with the Grsecurity.org patch applied, which is
enforcing page execution permissions (PAX) unless you turn them off
on a binary using the "chpax" userspace tool.
This means - unless you turn it off - an executable that is executing
code in a page which is not marked as
Jeff Clites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 14, 2004, at 12:10 PM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>> Proposal:
>> * we mandate that JIT code uses interpreter-relative addressing
>> - because almost all platforms do it
>> - because some platforms just can't do anything else
>> - and of course to avoid
Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It still doesn't make sense to me. Try adding the following line to
> both fixedpmcarray.pmc and perlint.pmc:
>METHOD INTVAL inheritme() { return 42; }
Ok, that's exactly that part, which currently *is* broken. If you have
some time please read src/obje
Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff Clites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At the same time, I'm not sure why we need this construct in a header:
>
> > struct Parrot_Interp;
>
> > typedef struct Parrot_Interp *Parrot_Interp;
>
> We don't need it. There was some discussio
10 matches
Mail list logo
