From: David P G. <gr...@us...> - 2005-01-26 01:40:35
|
> On a related note, I suggest we rename PARTICLE to be > MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT. As far as I can tell, this is what it is. I think > this name makes more sense as it is informative and it has symmetry with > our existing MAXIMUM_ALIGNMENT. Unless there are objections I will go > ahead and make this change soon. Sounds good. My wild guess is that if you replaced places in MMTk where it says BYTES_IN_INT with MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT, then things will be happy. One issue is that we need a mapping from MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT to the org.vmmagic.Address.load<FOO> and .store<FOO> functions that one should use to manipulate things of MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT bytes. I think this is one of the places where loadInt() is currently being used. Not sure what the cleanest way to do this is, which is partially what motivated my cop-out suggestion of merging MINIMUM_ALIGNMENT and BYTES_IN_WORD. I don't really want to do that, but if we are going to support them not being equal, then we need a clean way to specify the load/store instructions one would use.... --dave |