cacao 0.99.3: Added patch to fix PR99 (this time for real).

cacao 0.99.4: Dito.

diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.3.bb b/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.3.bb
index ce26209..912ddf8 100644 (file)
--- a/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.3.bb
+++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.3.bb
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 require cacao.inc
 
-PR = "r7"
+PR = "r8"
 
 SRC_URI = "\
   http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/cacaojvm/download/cacao-${PV}/cacao-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
@@ -9,4 +9,5 @@ SRC_URI = "\
   file://cacao-arm-race.patch;patch=1 \
   file://vfp-compat.patch;patch=1 \
   file://cacao-disable-stackbase-check.patch;patch=1 \
+  file://cacao_PR99_C_0.99.3.patch;patch=1 \
   "

diff --git a/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.4.bb b/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.4.bb
index 527529b..1fc29ca 100644 (file)
--- a/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.4.bb
+++ b/recipes/cacao/cacao_0.99.4.bb
@@ -1,8 +1,10 @@
 require cacao.inc
 
-PR = "r1"
+PR = "r2"
 
-SRC_URI = "http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/cacaojvm/download/cacao-${PV}/cacao-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
-          file://vfp-compat.patch;patch=1 \
-       file://cacao-disable-stackbase-check.patch;patch=1 \
-     "
+SRC_URI = "\
+       http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/cacaojvm/download/cacao-${PV}/cacao-${PV}.tar.bz2 \
+       file://vfp-compat.patch;patch=1 \
+       file://cacao-disable-stackbase-check.patch;patch=1 \
+       file://cacao_PR99_C_0.99.3.patch;patch=1 \
+       "

diff --git a/recipes/cacao/files/cacao_PR99_C_0.99.3.patch b/recipes/cacao/files/cacao_PR99_C_0.99.3.patch
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..9d10731
--- /dev/null
+++ b/recipes/cacao/files/cacao_PR99_C_0.99.3.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+Index: cacao-0.99.3/src/vm/jit/arm/codegen.h
+===================================================================
+--- cacao-0.99.3.orig/src/vm/jit/arm/codegen.h 2009-03-21 20:17:46.000000000 +0100
++++ cacao-0.99.3/src/vm/jit/arm/codegen.h      2009-03-21 20:18:19.000000000 +0100
+@@ -1107,15 +1107,22 @@
+ /* M_RECOMPUTE_PV:
+    used to recompute our PV (we use the IP for this) out of the current PC
+    ATTENTION: if you change this, you have to look at other functions as well!
+-   Following things depend on it: asm_call_jit_compiler(); codegen_findmethod();
++   Following things depend on it: md_codegen_get_pv_from_pc();
+ */
+ #define M_RECOMPUTE_PV(disp) \
+       disp += 8; /* we use PC relative addr.  */ \
+       assert((disp & 0x03) == 0); \
+       assert(disp >= 0 && disp <= 0x03ffffff); \
+-      M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PC, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 2, 1)); \
+-      if (disp > 0x000003ff) M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PV, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 10, 5)); \
+-      if (disp > 0x0003ffff) M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PV, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 18, 9)); \
++      if (disp > 0x0003ffff) { \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PC, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 18, 9)); \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PV, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 10, 5)); \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PV, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 2, 1)); \
++      } else if (disp > 0x000003ff) { \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PC, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 10, 5)); \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PV, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 2, 1)); \
++      } else { \
++              M_SUB_IMM(REG_PV, REG_PC, IMM_ROTL(disp >> 2, 1)); \
++      }
+ 
+ /* M_INTMOVE:
+    generates an integer-move from register a to b.
+Index: cacao-0.99.3/src/vm/jit/arm/md.h
+===================================================================
+--- cacao-0.99.3.orig/src/vm/jit/arm/md.h      2009-03-21 20:17:47.000000000 +0100
++++ cacao-0.99.3/src/vm/jit/arm/md.h   2009-03-21 20:18:19.000000000 +0100
+@@ -68,30 +68,40 @@
+ 
+ inline static u1 *md_codegen_get_pv_from_pc(u1 *ra)
+ {
++      u4 *pc; 
+       u1 *pv;
+-      u4  mcode1, mcode2, mcode3;
++      u4  mcode;
++      int mcode_idx;
+ 
++      pc = (u4*) ra;
+       pv = ra;
+ 
+       /* this can either be a RECOMPUTE_IP in JIT code or a fake in asm_calljavafunction */
+-      mcode1 = *((u4*) ra);
+-      if ((mcode1 & 0xffffff00) == 0xe24fcf00 /*sub ip,pc,#__*/)
+-              pv -= (s4) ((mcode1 & 0x000000ff) <<  2);
+-      else if ((mcode1 & 0xffffff00) == 0xe24fc000 /*sub ip,pc,#__*/)
+-              pv -= (s4) (mcode1 & 0x000000ff);
++      mcode_idx = 0;  
++      mcode = pc[0];
++
++      /* if this was shifted by 18 bits, we have to load additional instructions */
++      if ((mcode & 0xfff0ff00) == 0xe240c700 /*sub ip,??,#__*/) {
++              pv -= (s4) ((mcode & 0x000000ff) << 18);
++              mcode = pc[++mcode_idx];
++      }
++
++      /* if this was shifted by 10 bits, we have to load additional instructions */
++      if ((mcode & 0xfff0ff00) == 0xe240cb00 /*sub ip,??,#__*/) {
++              pv -= (s4) ((mcode & 0x000000ff) << 10);
++              mcode = pc[++mcode_idx];
++      }
++
++      /* this is the default path with just one instruction, shifted by 2 or no bits */
++      if ((mcode & 0xfff0ff00) == 0xe240cf00 /*sub ip,??,#__*/)
++              pv -= (s4) ((mcode & 0x000000ff) <<  2);
++      else if ((mcode & 0xffffff00) == 0xe24fc000 /*sub ip,pc,#__*/)
++              pv -= (s4) (mcode & 0x000000ff);
+       else {
+               /* if this happens, we got an unexpected instruction at (*ra) */
+-              vm_abort("Unable to find method: %p (instr=%x)", ra, mcode1);
++              vm_abort("Unable to find method: %p (instr=%x)", ra, mcode);
+       }
+ 
+-      /* if we have a RECOMPUTE_IP there can be more than one instruction */
+-      mcode2 = *((u4*) (ra + 4));
+-      mcode3 = *((u4*) (ra + 8));
+-      if ((mcode2 & 0xffffff00) == 0xe24ccb00 /*sub ip,ip,#__*/)
+-              pv -= (s4) ((mcode2 & 0x000000ff) << 10);
+-      if ((mcode3 & 0xffffff00) == 0xe24cc700 /*sub ip,ip,#__*/)
+-              pv -= (s4) ((mcode3 & 0x000000ff) << 18);
+-
+       /* we used PC-relative adressing; but now it is LR-relative */
+       pv += 8;
+