|
From: | Jeffrey Chimene |
Subject: | Re: [gforth] IA64 asm? |
Date: | Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:35:32 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 |
On 04/26/2013 04:49 AM, Bernd Paysan wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 25. April 2013, 18:17:04 schrieb Jeffrey Chimene: >> On 04/25/2013 05:26 PM, Bernd Paysan wrote: >>> Am Donnerstag, 25. April 2013, 12:17:15 schrieb Jeffrey Chimene: >>>> Hi Folks, >>>> >>>> I didn't see anything about this in the archives. >>>> >>>> Can anyone tell me why there's no IA64 assembler? >>> >>> Probably because nobody had the time to write one? >> >> HI Bernd, >> >> Thanks for the reply! >> >> I've been following GForth for a few years. I finally have a use case. >> >> Background >> ======= >> I'm interested in porting Node.js to OpenVMS. While I'd prefer >> starting w/ Alpha, it's probably better to start w/ IA64. >> >> To port Node.js, one must also port the V8 _javascript_ engine. V8 >> generates machine code at run time along two paths: a sort of "fast >> first" path, and a dynamically optimized path. Both paths converge on a >> set of common routines all of which converge on a common code generator. >> >> To bootstrap the porting process to Mips from an existing >> architecture (e.g. AMD64), somebody wrote a Mips simulator (C++). This >> simulator exports the same function signature as the code generator above. >> >> Today >> === >> The simulator is a fine piece of work, but it's written for a RISC >> machine. I cannot see converting the simulator out of the box to IA64. I >> really think I'm going to need a workbench to figure out the intricacies >> of IA64. Fortunately, I don't need the /entire/ IA64 instruction set. >> Some instructions are forbidden to user-space code, and other >> instructions don't make sense in the context of V8 (e.g. MMX & XMM >> instructions). Because this is OpenVMS, the alternate IA32e mode does >> not apply. Once I have that subset sort-of, kind-of working, I can >> direct attention to the simulator. >> >> And, what better workbench than Forth? >> >> Are you interested in the results? Or, is the subsetting a no-go for you? > > Several assemblers in Gforth (including x86/x64 and ARM) are subsets, because > there are so many additions to the ISAs, so subsets are not a problem at all. > Go for it and share the results! > Great! Thanks for the encouraging words! Be seeing you, jec |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |