|
From: Julian S. <js...@ac...> - 2012-10-11 13:30:34
|
On Tuesday, October 09, 2012, Petar Jovanovic wrote: > Any additional feedback on this one? > > More specific, any response on: > > Should we have two Ijk_SigFPEs, like Ijk_SigFPE1 and Ijk_SigFPE2, and > > multiply the rest of the code needed for this? Or something else? If it is only 2 cases you need, I would be OK with Ijk_SigFPE_IntDiv and Ijk_SigFPE_IntOvf (or whatever the names are). If it is more then I guess we should fix it properly. I prefer to avoid fixing it properly right now :-) since it will be a bit of work + extra complexity. Basically we'd have to make Ijk_SigFPE carry a value (eg, 32-bit int) from JIT generated code back to the scheduler. J |