Hi, after I read my mail again I am not sure it is clear what I wanted to say.
current operation: - push instruction. It will either a) push the current instruction b) push he constant pool, and push the current instruction - utility function: the next two instruction will be tightly coupled if the constant pool is pushed after the first instruction, push it NOW (implemented) planned operation: - we can extend our utility function for MORE than two instructions. -> we can use hard coded offsets from that time as the x86 port. Zoltan > Hi, > > Thanks :) > > we put all those constants into the constant pool. ARM supports position > independent code efficently, since its program counter is a regular > register as well. We can load, modify or even jump to the addresses which > are stored in the constant pool. Constant pools are dynamically put into > the jit code, except when we need tightly coupled instruction pairs. Those > must not be broken by a constant pool. > > Zoltan > >> Congratulations! >> any improvement on X86 hard coded offset for code patch? I mean X86 uses >> single pointer then a few constants closely coupled to X86 to patch >> code, >> which is a nightmare for porting. >> rgds >> joe > > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev > _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
