RE: [PATCH] Improved boehm-gc support for s390/s390x

["Boehm, Hans" <hans_boehm at hp dot com>]

My apologies for misreading the patch.

I assume there were never any 64-bit 370s.  Thinking about this some more, since you clearly rely on 390 extensions in at least that way, I don't have a strong opinion about the naming either.  I also have no idea whether anyone still cares about the UTS4 support, or whether the "S370" case can be eliminated completely.  If you like, please go ahead and check in the patch as is.

If it's OK with you, I will also put it in my tree.

Thanks.

Hans

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ulrich Weigand [mailto:Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 11:13 AM
> To: Boehm, Hans
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; java-patches@gcc.gnu.org; boehm@acm.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] Improved boehm-gc support for s390/s390x
> 
> 
> 
> Hans Boehm wrote:
> 
> >Is there a way to merge the S370 and S390 code?  I think 
> this patch still
> >leaves some #defines to handle the S370/LINUX case, which is 
> no longer
> >possible?  If it really makes sense to distinguish S370 (as 
> in the old
> >Amdahl UTS4 support) from S390, perhaps the LINUX OS case 
> should only be
> >handled for S390?
> 
> Actually, the patch removes the LINUX subcase from S370 (so that only
> UTS4 remains), and handles LINUX only under the new S390 machine type.
> 
> >Unfortunately, I know very little about the differences between the
> >architectures, and what naming makes sense.
> 
> I've no strong opinion either way; I wanted to make sure the inline
> assemblies are only used on s390 because I'm not definite whether
> the old S/370 hardware already has the COMPARE AND SWAP instruction
> (I think some models had it and others not ...). [But as the assembly
> is under an additional __GNUC__ guard, it wouldn't be used on UTS4
> anyway, so this is no hard reason, but mostly cosmetic.]
> 
> In any case I've no access to such old hardware (nor to UTS4 for that
> matter), and thus no way to test any changes, so maybe it's better to
> just leave the old code alone ...
> 
> But if you prefer, I'll move the s390/s390x Linux support back to
> the S370 machine type.
> 
> >Otherwise this looks good to me.  Generally we've tried to 
> keep my version
> >and the one in gcc synchronized as much as possible.  Things 
> like this seem
> >to get integrated into both at roughly the same time.  Once 
> you check it
> >into the gcc tree, I can integrate it into my tree as well.  
> (Currently I
> >believe the two GC versions are a bit different, in that 6.1 
> has not been
> >integrated into gcc.  But they differ mostly in ways that 
> are not relevant
> >to libgcj.)
> 
> So if you agree with the machine type issue, I'll go ahead 
> and check it
> in.  Otherwise, I'll redo the patch.
> 
> 
> Mit freundlichen Gruessen / Best Regards
> 
> Ulrich Weigand
> 
> --
>   Dr. Ulrich Weigand
>   Linux for S/390 Design & Development
>   IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH, Schoenaicher Str. 220, 
> 71032 Boeblingen
>   Phone: +49-7031/16-3727   ---   Email: Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com
> 
>