Skip to content

Minor changes to make it easier to sync diagnostic repo copy #107066

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 28, 2024

Conversation

mikem8361
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@mikem8361 mikem8361 requested a review from hoyosjs August 28, 2024 00:52
@mikem8361 mikem8361 self-assigned this Aug 28, 2024
@ghost ghost added the area-VM-coreclr label Aug 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @mangod9
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Copy link
Member

@hoyosjs hoyosjs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm. A GC / VM dev should also ok this.

@@ -2093,7 +2095,7 @@ void GcInfoDecoder::ReportRegisterToGC(
LOG((LF_GCROOTS, LL_INFO1000, "Reporting " FMT_REG, regNum ));

OBJECTREF* pObjRef = GetRegisterSlot( regNum, pRD );
#if defined(TARGET_UNIX) && !defined(FEATURE_NATIVEAOT) && !defined(SOS_TARGET_AMD64)
#if defined(TARGET_UNIX) && !defined(FEATURE_NATIVEAOT) && !defined(SOS_TARGET_RISCV64)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Was replacing ARM64 with RISCV64 intentional or do we need both?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, they were incorrect and caused build problems in the diagnostic repo. This section of code is under ifdef TARGET_RISCV64.

@@ -1976,7 +1978,7 @@ void GcInfoDecoder::ReportRegisterToGC(

gcFlags |= GC_CALL_PINNED;
}
#endif // TARGET_UNIX && !SOS_TARGET_ARM64
#endif // TARGET_UNIX && !SOS_TARGET_LOONGARCH64
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Also here, should we keep both conditions?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, they were incorrect and caused build problems in the diagnostic repo. This section of code is under ifdef TARGET_LOONGARCH64.

@mikem8361 mikem8361 merged commit 75adbc7 into dotnet:main Aug 28, 2024
90 checks passed
@mikem8361 mikem8361 deleted the diagsync branch August 28, 2024 20:43
jtschuster pushed a commit to jtschuster/runtime that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2024
…107066)

* Minor changes to make it easier to sync diagnostic repo copy

* Undo ELF.h changes.
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 28, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants