Re: [MirageOS-devel] Mirage on Xen/ARM status

[Thomas Leonard <talex5@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 13 June 2014 10:09, Anil Madhavapeddy <anil@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2014, at 15:46, Thomas Leonard <talex5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> The next step is to get networking working on ARM.
>>
>> This seems to be working now (I can telnet to port 80 and send it a
>> message), which it displays on the console.
>
> Fantastic!!
>
>> The main problem turned out to be ones_complement_checksum_bigarray,
>> which was doing unaligned double-word (64-bit) memory access. This
>> faults on ARM. For testing, I replaced it with the version in the unix
>> directory.
>
> Interesting -- they were meant to be exactly the same if I remember.
> Is there an actual code difference between the two aside from include
> headers?

They are very different. Looks like one got optimised without the other here:

https://github.com/mirage/mirage-platform/commit/6fc97d77d0846bc7f17bd0702832ea1faa8a7e71


-- 
Dr Thomas Leonard        http://0install.net/
GPG: 9242 9807 C985 3C07 44A6  8B9A AE07 8280 59A5 3CC1
GPG: DA98 25AE CAD0 8975 7CDA  BD8E 0713 3F96 CA74 D8BA

_______________________________________________
MirageOS-devel mailing list
MirageOS-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel