Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "87a5d38f".
2013 Sep 10
0
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
On 10 Sep 2013, at 10:13, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:
> How did you come with 320 bits?
> 320=64*4+64, which is the size of the metadata table entry plus pointer size,
Sorry, that should have been 192. The specification allows the metadata to be stored either in look-aside tables or explicitly managed. The tables impose a very large storage space penalty, so are
2013 Sep 10
2
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
...e
> instructions (loads and stores) operate on the pointer + metadata.
>
Which MPX instructions do you mean here?
--kcc
>
> David
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130910/87a5d38f/attachment.html>
2013 Sep 10
2
[LLVMdev] Intel Memory Protection Extensions (and types question)
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk
> wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> We're also interested in support for fat pointers in LLVM/clang and it
> would be nice to have some general infrastructure for them (we currently
> have a load of hacks). There are a lot of research architectures with fat
> pointers, and MPX is likely to be just