Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Available_bits_offset vs status_offset #17

Open
qinsoon opened this issue Mar 26, 2020 · 6 comments
Open

Available_bits_offset vs status_offset #17

qinsoon opened this issue Mar 26, 2020 · 6 comments

Comments

@qinsoon
Copy link
Member

qinsoon commented Mar 26, 2020

In GitLab by @caizixian on Mar 23, 2018, 13:21
@qinsoon
Copy link
Member Author

qinsoon commented Mar 26, 2020

In GitLab by @caizixian on Mar 23, 2018, 13:22

https://gitlab.anu.edu.au/mmtk/mmtk/blob/master/src/vm/jikesrvm/object_model.rs#L256

@qinsoon
Copy link
Member Author

qinsoon commented Mar 26, 2020

In GitLab by @caizixian on Jul 1, 2018, 15:11

assigned to @caizixian

@qinsoon
Copy link
Member Author

qinsoon commented Mar 26, 2020

In GitLab by @caizixian on Jul 1, 2018, 15:12

removed assignee

@qinsoon
Copy link
Member Author

qinsoon commented Jun 5, 2020

It is unclear what this issue is about. The link is out-updated.

@caizixian
Copy link
Member

mmtk-jikesrvm/mmtk/src/java_header.rs

Line 12 in 2763eaf

#[cfg(target_endian = "little")]
some comments can be used to distinguish AVAILABLE_BITS_OFFSET and STATUS_OFFSET, e.g. available bits are a subset of status word.

@qinsoon
Copy link
Member Author

qinsoon commented Jun 5, 2020

Thanks a lot. It looks like it is a JikesRVM binding issue. I will move it to mmtk-jikesrvm.

@qinsoon qinsoon transferred this issue from mmtk/mmtk-core Jun 5, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@qinsoon @caizixian