71654 - no support for xptcall on BSD/OS (sparc)

Status: VERIFIED FIXED

(Core :: XPConnect, defect)

Description

[lidl]

Currently, there is no support for the xptinvoke for BSD/OS
on sparc architecture machines.

Several months ago, Chris Torek worked on this problem with
me, but I was not able to confirm, at the time, whether the
code he wrote worked or not.  Today, I was able to build a
fresh snapshot and have it work on a SparcStation4, running
BSD/OS 4.2.

I've included a patch and a new file that adds support for this
machine/OS combination.

-Kurt

Comment 1

[lidl]

Attachment: patch to add xptcall support for Sparc BSD/OS

Comment 2

[John Bandhauer]

shaver, are you up for this?

Comment 3

[Mike Shaver (:shaver emeritus)]

Yeah, I'm an xptcall-ports machine these days.  [e-mail], can you see how,
if at all, this relates to the recently-added NetBSD/SPARC support?

Comment 4

[lidl]

Well, offhand, I'd say it differs from the netbsd-sparc support in that
it actually represents a step ahead in coding, rather than a simple
renaming of files that diff reports as the same.

The files:

xptcinvoke_sparc_netbsd.cpp
xptcstubs_asm_sparc_netbsd.s
xptcstubs_sparc_netbsd.cpp
xptcinvoke_asm_sparc_netbsd.s

Are identical to the solaris versions of the same files. (Or at least
that's what's in my CVS pull from earlier today.)

There was exactly one new file for the BSD/OS (sparc) version, which
was derived from the Linux version, cleaned up and made (at the
cycle by cycle counting level) slightly faster. You will notice that
the BSD/OS patch carefully reuses the solaris versions of the .cpp files
where it can.

The BSD/OS assembly file also has the nice quality of being extensively
commented as to what the code is doing.

Comment 5

[Mike Shaver (:shaver emeritus)]

Sounds great to me, but you probably don't want to put the NPL on there.  If you
want, I can change to the MPL and give either yourselves or BSDI the copyright.
 Or, you can do it.  But really, the NPL is inappropriate here.  (I'll commit
anyway, to make forward progress, but let me know shortly how you want to proceed.)

I'll try to get this into the 0.8.1 tree as well, in case someone wants to
produce a 0.8.1 BSD/OS (SPARC) build.

Comment 6

[Mike Shaver (:shaver emeritus)]

In the tip and the 0.8.1 branch.  If you're interested in contributing a 0.8.1
build for BSD/OS (SPARC), please read
http://www.mozilla.org/build/distribution.html and send me email when the build
is ready to be put on the FTP site.

Thanks for your contribution!  (And let me know what to do about the licensing.)

Comment 7

[lidl]

As for the copyright on the code, I think that the NPL was in vogue
when the code was first written.  I know I don't care about which
copyright the code has, and I don't think that Chris Torek cares
about this code fragment either.

Please change the copyright on the contributed file to whatever
best suites the mozilla project's needs -- whether it be MPL or GPL,
I don't care about.

As for the builds -- I've been doing the BSD/OS (x86) contributed
builds that have shown up.  Now that this code is in the both the
current release branch and the mainline, I'll almost certainly start
building a sparc version for BSD/OS too.

Thanks!

Comment 8

[Phil Schwartau]

Want to mark this Verified, but I have a question: 


The changes currently indicated in Bonsai only include the top part of the 
patch attached to this bug. Starting with these lines, the remaining part of 
the patch has not been checked in:


 ifeq ($(OS_ARCH),Linux)
--- /dev/null   Sun Mar 11 22:40:21 2001
+++ xptcinvoke_asm_sparc_bsdos.s        Sun Mar 11 12:25:52 2001
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@

      etc.
      etc. 



Is that correct?  If so, I'll mark this VERIFIED - thanks.

Comment 9

[lidl]

Not quite.

The second part of the patch was an entirely new file.  I diff'd it
against /dev/null since I wanted to make sure that the entire file
got included.

I'm not sure what the "correct" patch style is to indicate an
entirely new file, but that's what the second part of the patch
is.  It will need to be added to the CVS repository, probably via
'cvs add' or something like that.

Comment 10

[Phil Schwartau]

OK, I see what you mean.

shaver has checked xptcinvoke_asm_sparc_bsdos.s into the CVS repository, 
so we're all set. Marking VERIFIED.