Closed
Bug 902908
Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
Rename js/src/ion to js/src/jit
Categories
(Core :: JavaScript Engine, defect)
Core
JavaScript Engine
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla26
People
(Reporter: jandem, Assigned: jandem)
Details
(Whiteboard: [qa-])
Attachments
(3 files)
276.98 KB,
patch
|
luke
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
276.43 KB,
patch
|
luke
:
review+
bajaj
:
approval-mozilla-aurora+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
216.64 KB,
patch
|
luke
:
review+
bajaj
:
approval-mozilla-beta+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
As discussed on the mailing list last week, this patch renames js/src/ion to js/src/jit.
It also renames the ifdefs in the header files, for instance ion_TypePolicy_h -> jit_TypePolicy_h
What may be a problem for some people is that the "jit-test" directory and the "jit" directory both start with "jit", so the shell does not complete "jit<tab>" to "jit/" If anybody thinks that's a problem please speak up..
I can build a shell with this patch, but still need to send this to Try.
Attachment #787502 -
Flags: review?(luke)
![]() |
||
Comment 1•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 787502 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch
Great! As for 'jit-test', hopefully, in the long term, we'll roll that into src/tests so that *gasp* we only have a single shell testing harness.
Attachment #787502 -
Flags: review?(luke) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/fe7a314efca0
Sorry for breaking everybody's patches.. Though "hg rebase" should take care of that just fine. If you don't use hg rebase, replacing ion/ with jit/ in the patch file should work..
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•12 years ago
|
||
Follow-up to touch CLOBBER:
https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/105f90f2e28b
Comment 4•12 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/fe7a314efca0
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/105f90f2e28b
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla26
![]() |
||
Comment 5•12 years ago
|
||
Any plans to rename the |ion| namespace?
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Nicholas Nethercote [:njn] from comment #5)
> Any plans to rename the |ion| namespace?
Yup, that's next. I also want to rename
IonRuntime -> JitRuntime
IonCompartment -> JitCompartment
IonCode -> JitCode
IonFrames -> JitFrames
(These are used by both JITs.)
Comment 7•12 years ago
|
||
While you are busy, what about renaming "jit-tests.py --ion" to "jit-tests.py --jit". IIRC --ion also tests --eager-baseline.
Comment 8•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jan de Mooij [:jandem] from comment #6)
> Yup, that's next. I also want to rename
>
> IonFrames -> JitFrames
Do you mind if I do the renaming of the last one? As I currently have a *Huge* pile of patches waiting for review on these files. (Bug 878503)
Otherwise, somebody can just review these patches (22+ … and more coming) such as I land them before you do the modifications, but I guess this will require that nobody enforce that these patches should not be reviewed.
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•12 years ago
|
||
Renaming js/src/ion to js/src/jit makes backporting JIT patches to aurora, beta and ESR24 a lot more annoying. As suggested in bug 909499 comment 2, we'd like to backport these changes to aurora and beta (including ESR24). To quote Waldo:
> Failing that, I think we should seriously consider redoing this rename for
> esr24 as well. As long as we're careful about it just being renaming, I
> think it'd be worth it to avoid ten months of backport conflict-fixing. To
> be honest, that scares me more than the possibility of screwing something up
> in a single, concerted renaming backport-session.
Attachment #796606 -
Flags: review?(luke)
Attachment #796606 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora?
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•12 years ago
|
||
See comment 9.
Attachment #796611 -
Flags: review?(luke)
Attachment #796611 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
![]() |
||
Comment 11•12 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 796606 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch for aurora
Thanks for doing this Jan.
Attachment #796606 -
Flags: review?(luke) → review+
![]() |
||
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #796611 -
Flags: review?(luke) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 12•12 years ago
|
||
Pushed to try:
Beta: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=70cf061b3b2c
Aurora: https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Try&rev=2947743914ba
Comment 14•12 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM UTC-4] from comment #13)
> Try pushes are green.
That was quick :), Looks good to land , approving !
Flags: needinfo?(bbajaj)
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #796606 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-aurora? → approval-mozilla-aurora+
Updated•12 years ago
|
Attachment #796611 -
Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
Comment 15•12 years ago
|
||
Comment 16•12 years ago
|
||
Assuming no QA needed here. Please remove [qa-] from the whiteboard and add the verifyme keyword if this needs QA.
Whiteboard: [qa-]
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•