Hi Koby, This sounds awesome. A good list of people to CC on the bug for reviews are:
[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected],[email protected] - Saam > On Sep 16, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Filip Pizlo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Sep 16, 2018, at 2:09 AM, Koby Boyango <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Thanks for taking the time to look into the project :) >> >> Filip - I would love to. Should I create one bug for all of the patches, or >> a bug for each patch? >> Also, there is an existing bug that I've reported a while ago, but worked >> around it for now: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=184232. It isn't >> relevant in newer versions of node (it came from node's Buffer constructor, >> which have changed since), but I'll still be happy to send a patch if needed. > > I think that you want a parent bug that’s just an umbrella and then have bugs > that block it for each patch. > > -Filip > >> >> Yusuke - It's interesting to compare, especially on an iOS device. I will >> also try to do some measurements :) Do you have a benchmark you recommend? >> But assuming it is worth it, enabling LLInt ASM without the JIT would be >> great as it would probably reduce the binary size and compilation time by >> quite a bit. >> NativeScript is also using it without the JIT (and they link to an article >> containing some benchmarks), so they would profit from this too. >> https://github.com/NativeScript/ios-runtime/commit/1528ed50f85998147b190c22a390b5eca36c5acb >> >> Koby >> >>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 2:51 AM Yusuke Suzuki <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> Really great! >>> >>> node-jsc sounds very exciting to me. From the users' view, t is nice if we >>> run app constructed in node.js manner in iOS devices. >>> In addition, from the JSC developers' view, it is also awesome. It allows >>> us to easily run node.js libraries / benchmarks / tests on JSC, which is >>> really great since, >>> >>> 1. We can run tests designed for node.js, it makes our JSC implementation >>> more solid. >>> 2. We can run benchmarks designed for node.js including JS libraries. JS >>> libraries distributed in npm are more and more used in both node.js and >>> browser world. >>> If we can have a way to run benchmarks in popular libraries on JSC easily, >>> that offers great opportunities to optimize JSC on them. >>> >>>> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 5:20 AM Filip Pizlo <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Wow! That’s pretty cool! >>>> >>>> I think that it would be great for this to be upstreamed. Can you create a >>>> bug on bugs.webkit.org and post your patches for review? >>>> >>>> -Filip >>>> >>>>> On Sep 13, 2018, at 4:02 PM, Koby Boyango <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I'm Koby Boyango, a senior researcher and developer at mce, and I've >>>>> created node-jsc, an experimental port of node.js to the JavaScriptCore >>>>> engine and iOS specifically. >>>>> >>>>> node-jsc's core component, "jscshim" (deps/jscshim), implements (parts >>>>> of) v8 API on top of JavaScriptCore. It contains a stripped down version >>>>> of WebKit's source code (mainly JSC and WTF). To build WebKit, I'm using >>>>> CMake to build the JSCOnly port, with JSC\WTF compiled as static >>>>> libraries. For iOS I'm using my own build script with a custom toolchain >>>>> file. >>>>> >>> I'm really happy to hear that your node-jsc is using JSCOnly ports :) >>>>> The project also includes node-native-script, NativeScript's iOS runtime >>>>> refactored as node-jsc native module, allowing access to native iOS APIs >>>>> directly from javascript. >>>>> >>>>> So first of all, I wanted to share this project with the WebKit developer >>>>> community. >>>>> It's my first time working with WebKit, and node-jsc has been a great >>>>> opportunity to experiment with it. >>>>> >>>>> Second, as I needed to make some minor changes\additions, I'm using my >>>>> own fork. I would love to discuss some of the changes I've made, and >>>>> offer some patches if you'll find them useful. >>>>> "WebKit Fork and Compilation" describes WebKit's usage in node-jsc and >>>>> the major changes\additions I've made in my fork (node-jsc's README and >>>>> jschim's documentation contains some more information). >>>>> >>> Great, it is really nice if you have a patch for upstream :) >>> Looking through the documents, I have one question on LLInt v.s. CLoop. >>> >>> https://github.com/mceSystems/node-jsc/blob/master/deps/jscshim/docs/webkit_fork_and_compilation.md#webkit-port-and-compilation >>> > Use the optimized assembly version of LLInt (JSC's interpreter), not >>> > cloop. This requires enabling JIT support, although we won't be using the >>> > JIT (but we can omit the FTL jit). >>> >>> I would like to know how fast LLInt ASM interpreter is when comparing CLoop >>> interpreter. >>> If it shows nice speedup, enabling LLInt ASM interpreter without JIT for >>> major architectures (x64, ARM64) sounds nice. >>> As a bonus, if we offer this build configuration (using LLInt ASM >>> interpreter without JIT), we can enable SamplingProfiler for this, which is >>> disabled for CLoop builds. >>> >>> Personally, I'm also interested in this thing. I'll set up the environment >>> to measure it later too :) >>> >>>>> Besides that, I will appreciate any opinions\ideas\insights\suggestions >>>>> :) >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> Koby >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> webkit-dev mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webkit-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
