search for: gcmalloc

...to natively compile these classes and decrease the bootstrap time. So, if you have a segmentation fault at this stage, it means that you have broken something in the interface between MMTk and VMKit. If it can helps you: * during a first stage, we compile VMKit and J3 with a fake MMTk (we replace gcmalloc by a simple malloc) * we use the generated VMKit/J3 to natively compile MMTk * we link this code with VMKit and replace malloc by the gcmalloc of MMTk. At this stage, you have VMKit that use MMTk. In your case, the compilation is correct up to this stage, meaning that VMKit is still able to compile...

Hi, I replaced the MMTk code with a C-version MMTk code (I have been working on such AOT compiler for a while). The compiler should deal with most of the MMTk code base correctly - at least I get marksweep running with a tiny client). So I am trying to put the C version MMTk back with VmKit. I tried not to change much existing code except where necessary, such as name mangling and MMTkObject

Hi, I'm trying to sort out how MMTk is linked with VMKit. MMTk is written in Java and VMKit is written in C++, and there are some java files and something seems to be garbage collection in c++ sources. Could you tell me where exactly mark and sweep algorithm takes place in (java?) source code and how and where is it invoked in c++? Regards, Liana Bakradze. -------------- next part

Hi Andrew (hi all:)), I perfectly understand the problem of relocation and it's really not a problem in my case. I'm still trying to make MCJIT runs but I face a small problem. I have to insert callback to the runtime for functions provided by vmkit (for example, a gcmalloc function to allocate memory from the heap). With the old JIT, VMKit simply loads a large bc file that contains all the needed functions at runtime and, as they are also compiled the VMKit binary binary, we manually associate the llvm function names to their physical address through an addGlobalMapp...

...Hi Andrew (hi all:)), > > I perfectly understand the problem of relocation and it's really not a > problem in my case. I'm still trying to make MCJIT runs but I face a > small problem. I have to insert callback to the runtime for functions > provided by vmkit (for example, a gcmalloc function to allocate memory > from the heap). With the old JIT, VMKit simply loads a large bc file > that contains all the needed functions at runtime and, as they are > also compiled the VMKit binary binary, we manually associate the llvm > function names to their physical address thro...

...Andrew (hi all:)), > > I perfectly understand the problem of relocation and it's really not a > problem in my case. I'm still trying to make MCJIT runs but I face a > small problem. I have to insert callback to the runtime for functions > provided by vmkit (for example, a gcmalloc function to allocate memory > from the heap). With the old JIT, VMKit simply loads a large bc file > that contains all the needed functions at runtime and, as they are > also compiled the VMKit binary binary, we manually associate the llvm > function names to their physical address...

...tached the asm code, it can give you some ideas if you plan to integrate a stub generator able to perform dynamic dispatch like virtual call in c++) because MCJIT does not provide this facility. So, for each function, I define a module. In each module, I have to define the runtime function (such as gcmalloc, throwException and this kind of functions). They are defined in a separated runtime module populated during the bootstrap. I have thus this picture MCJIT |---------------------------------------------------------- | | | Runtime module...

...), >> >> I perfectly understand the problem of relocation and it's really not a >> problem in my case. I'm still trying to make MCJIT runs but I face a >> small problem. I have to insert callback to the runtime for functions >> provided by vmkit (for example, a gcmalloc function to allocate memory >> from the heap). With the old JIT, VMKit simply loads a large bc file >> that contains all the needed functions at runtime and, as they are >> also compiled the VMKit binary binary, we manually associate the llvm >> function names to their physi...

...>> >> I perfectly understand the problem of relocation and it's really not >> a problem in my case. I'm still trying to make MCJIT runs but I face >> a small problem. I have to insert callback to the runtime for >> functions provided by vmkit (for example, a gcmalloc function to >> allocate memory from the heap). With the old JIT, VMKit simply loads >> a large bc file that contains all the needed functions at runtime >> and, as they are also compiled the VMKit binary binary, we manually >> associate the llvm function names to their p...

...tached the asm code, it can give you some ideas if you plan to integrate a stub generator able to perform dynamic dispatch like virtual call in c++) because MCJIT does not provide this facility. So, for each function, I define a module. In each module, I have to define the runtime function (such as gcmalloc, throwException and this kind of functions). They are defined in a separated runtime module populated during the bootstrap. > I have thus this picture > > MCJIT > |---------------------------------------------------------- > | |...

...tached the asm code, it can give you some ideas if you plan to integrate a stub generator able to perform dynamic dispatch like virtual call in c++) because MCJIT does not provide this facility. So, for each function, I define a module. In each module, I have to define the runtime function (such as gcmalloc, throwException and this kind of functions). They are defined in a separated runtime module populated during the bootstrap. > I have thus this picture > > MCJIT > |---------------------------------------------------------- > | |...

...tached the asm code, it can give you some ideas if you plan to integrate a stub generator able to perform dynamic dispatch like virtual call in c++) because MCJIT does not provide this facility. So, for each function, I define a module. In each module, I have to define the runtime function (such as gcmalloc, throwException and this kind of functions). They are defined in a separated runtime module populated during the bootstrap. I have thus this picture MCJIT |---------------------------------------------------------- | | | Runtime module...

Hi Andy, We had previous discussions about this, I'd like to state more exactly what features would make MCJIT a replacement for the JIT. After putting significant effort trying to move to MCJIT, I'm currently back with the JIT. This is in a REPL environment where functions are added and removed dynamically and response time is important. The issue is the legacy JIT provides great

Hi Gaël, I'm not familiar enough with the details of the old JIT engine and its event interface to comment on whether or not your changes are appropriate, but I'm not sure anyone is so the patch is probably OK as is. I don't see any obvious problems with it. However, your description of the changes raises a bigger issue in my mind. I'm not sure if you are aware of this, but