search for: vm_prot_copi

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "vm_prot_copi".

Did you mean: vm_prot_copy
2012 Nov 17
4
[LLVMdev] mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems
"ARM Darwin can't do this. Memory is never allowed to be both writable and executable at the same time." That seems very sensible. So do the JIT engines just not work there now? Currently both MCJIT and JIT are using AllocateRWX which on that platform mmap's the memory as RX, then vm_protect's it as RX+VM_PROT_COPY, then vm_protect's it as RW. My best guess is that
2012 Nov 27
0
[LLVMdev] mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems
On Nov 16, 2012, at 4:12 PM, "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > “ARM Darwin can't do this. Memory is never allowed to be both writable and executable at the same time.” > > That seems very sensible. So do the JIT engines just not work there now? They work by allocating RW memory, then switching the permissions to RX before running any code
2012 Nov 16
0
[LLVMdev] mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems
Hi Andy, On Nov 16, 2012, at 1:56 PM, "Kaylor, Andrew" <andrew.kaylor at intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me something about mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems? Some. :) > > I’m working on a new memory manager implementation for MCJIT and I want to replace calls to Memory::AllocateRWX with calls to Memory::allocateMappedMemory, possibly still
2012 Nov 16
2
[LLVMdev] mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems
Hi, Can anyone tell me something about mmap and vm_protect on ARM+Apple systems? I'm working on a new memory manager implementation for MCJIT and I want to replace calls to Memory::AllocateRWX with calls to Memory::allocateMappedMemory, possibly still with the RWX flags. However, looking at the Memory::AllocateRWX implementation I see that it's jumping through some hoops in the case