Re: hppa in danger of being ignored for testing migration and eventual removal
Matthias Klose wrote:
> dann frazier schrieb:
>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 05:09:25PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Luk Claes <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> * Has progress been made regarding proper java support?
>>> What is considered proper java support? GCJ?
>>> Dave, have you tinkered with GCJ lately?
> GCJ-4.4 works fine on hppa, currently waiting in NEW ... so if you do want to
> see this resolved, please help with getting this accepted.
> Note that this doesn't work very well with NPTL (Ubuntu karmic), so please make
> sure that this continues to work with an glibc update.
> OpenJDK is non-trivial. Andrew Haley did have a look at this and came to the
> conclusion that the byte code interpreter for the zero port needs porting for
> archs with upward growing stacks.
It might not be horribly difficult to fix. The crash comes when the VM
calls mprotect() on the second page of the stack as a guard against stack
overflow: obviously that isn't going to work if your stack grows upwards.
I don't know if that is the only place in which the VM assumes the stack
grows downwards. It's a matter of debugging, if anyone on hppa cares enough
to get OpenJDK working.