Chromium Code Reviews
chromiumcodereview-hr@appspot.gserviceaccount.com (chromiumcodereview-hr) | Please choose your nickname with Settings | Help | Chromium Project | Gerrit Changes | Sign out
(57)

Issue 160160: X64: Add inline cache stub for storing to globals. (Closed)

Created:
11 years, 5 months ago by William Hesse
Modified:
9 years, 7 months ago
CC:
v8-dev
Visibility:
Public.

Description

X64: Add inline cache stub for storing to globals. Committed: http://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=2543

Patch Set 1 #

Total comments: 4

Patch Set 2 : '' #

Unified diffs Side-by-side diffs Delta from patch set Stats (+31 lines, -3 lines) Patch
M src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc View 1 1 chunk +30 lines, -2 lines 0 comments Download
M test/mjsunit/mjsunit.status View 1 1 chunk +1 line, -1 line 0 comments Download

Messages

Total messages: 3 (0 generated)
William Hesse
A small review for you.
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-27 13:55:55 UTC) #1
Kevin Millikin (Chromium)
LGTM. http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/3 File src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc (right): http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/3#newcode499 Line 499: __ DecrementCounter(&Counters::named_store_global_inline, 1); It seems weird to ...
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-27 14:31:42 UTC) #2
William Hesse
11 years, 5 months ago (2009-07-27 15:01:48 UTC) #3
http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/3
File src/x64/stub-cache-x64.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/3#newcode499
Line 499: __ DecrementCounter(&Counters::named_store_global_inline, 1);
On 2009/07/27 14:31:42, Kevin Millikin wrote:
> It seems weird to increment this counter on all paths and then decrement it
> here.  Why not increment it on only the fast path?

Changed per suggestion.

http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/2
File test/mjsunit/mjsunit.status (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/160160/diff/1/2#newcode101
Line 101: new: PASS, CRASH || FAIL if ($mode == debug)
On 2009/07/27 14:31:42, Kevin Millikin wrote:
> I'm surprised by the test expectation change (the commit message doesn't
mention
> it).  Do you really expect this test to pass in release mode now, or do you
mean
> that the old CRASH || FAIL behavior is still OK?

changed to PASS || CRASH || FAIL

Powered by Google App Engine
This is Rietveld 408576698