Re: [Dpcl-develop] 64-bit DPCL

[Dave W. <dwo...@us...>]

Steve
There is no compelling reason for you to pick up the hybrid code strictly 
for the 64 bit library build directory change right now. This was done 
solely to put in place some build structure changes that are needed for 
systems which support both 32 bit and 64 bit processes running at the same 
time, the primary system at this time being AIX. For systems such as i386 
Linux, which supports only 32 bit processes, there is no benefit. 

I understand ia64 Linux supports both i386 32 bit processes in emulation 
mode and ia64 64 bit processes in native mode. That will introduce 
complications of it's own since that means supporting two different 
instruction architectures on the same machine. At the minimum it means the 
build needs to build the library in i386 mode with one set of compiler and 
associated tools and then build it again in ia64 mode using the native 
compiler and associated tools. I suggest we not worry about that 
combination right now.

Note that this does not mean you should avoid the hybrid code, since the 
only changes are to build structure and you should be able to build the 
ia64 DPCL using the new build structure. If there are changes in the 
hybrid code that you are waiting for, then that is good reason to use the 
latest hybrid code.

Dave




Steve Collins <sl...@cl...>
Sent by: dpc...@ww...
01/30/2004 02:20 PM
 
        To:     dpc...@ww...
        cc:     sl...@cl...
        Subject:        [Dpcl-develop] 64-bit DPCL



   JamesW informed me recently that the hybrid_121503_2.tgz has
 the 64 bit library build directory from DaveW. Should I pick this
 up now or wait until all the 64 bit work is done? 
   My status right now is that I have a simple DPCL program which
 does no more than a 'bcreate' and I have run this successfully
 'off chip' between two partitions on an in-house 64-bit Altix.
 Exciting stuff. But now I have a little bit more of a DPCL test
 which does the 'bcreate' but also a 'bexpand', 'get_program_object',
 'bexpand' and 'binstall_probe' of a simple expression that does
 nothing more than insert a call to the 'sleep' function. Now I
 realize I may be way ahead of myself here, but is it worth
 getting hybrid_121503_2.tgz and its 64-bit code and will that
 be enough to successfully do the 'sleep' instrumentation?
   As always, thanks to DaveW, JamesW, AlbertF, ToddM for their
 incredible support.

                                      Thanks again - SteveC
                                          SGI Compilers/Tools
_______________________________________________
Dpcl-develop mailing list
Dpc...@ww...
http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/dpcl-develop