--- Begin Message ---
|
Subject: |
Re: lightning for x86-64??? |
|
Date: |
Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:17:56 -0400 |
On Oct 26, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > On Oct 26, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> >> Hey, would you like to contribute it back??? I'd be thrilled! :-)
> >
> > Actually it's Matthew Flatt who did the (hard) work of making it
> > work and should get the credit (CCed). I'm sure that he'll also
> > think that merging these changes back into lightening is avery
> > good idea. If we get our sources to match the official Lightning
> > sources, then pulling new stuff that you do is easier -- so this
> > is definitely a step in the right direction.
> >
> As a first check, the diffs merge cleanly into my lightning (whose
> CVS is always on Savannah).
Good!
> However, I would like to have a asm-32.h and asm-64.h file
> (including a common asm-i386.h file) and only one of them would be
> used (through symbolic links). If you can do the testing, I can do
> the work.
I *hope* I can do the testing -- the thing is that (as you have
probably seen) Matthew took a few parts and used them directly. So I
might get stuck and ask him for help. Also, the testing will be in
the form of compiling and using mzscheme (which JITs code through
lightning).
IIUC, I can try things quickly by hacking a foo.h file that will have:
#ifdef JIT_X86_64
# include asm-64.h
#else
# include asm-32.h
#endif
and if that works, hack the parts of mzscheme configuration that use
one of these directly instead of foo.h.
> >> (In principle I can just take it from mzscheme because of the
> >> GPL, but I thought I'd ask first).
> >
> > (You mean LGPL, I hope -- we're LGPL so we cannot use GPL
> > software...)
> >
> Well yeah. Sorry, it's 3am here.
>
> Let's continue the discussion on address@hidden (not CCed for
> privacy in case you disagree).
No problems -- feel free to forward these messages there for
archiving.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://www.barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
--- End Message ---