Skip to content
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

Possibilities with new altjit naming convention #283

Open
kunalspathak opened this issue Sep 10, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Possibilities with new altjit naming convention #283

kunalspathak opened this issue Sep 10, 2020 · 0 comments
Assignees

Comments

@kunalspathak
Copy link
Member

From @AndyAyersMS in #282 (comment)

Now that the altjit naming is systematic I wonder if we should add "wildcard" support, eg run batches of diffs using all known altjit os/isa combinations or something?

Also if/when a regular jit can run as an altjit some of the file swapping done by jit-dasm-pmi can be simplified as we no longer need to replace the "real jit" -- and once we do this we can perhaps also change the concurrently model for jit-dasm-pmi to be more like the one we use for crossgen (run base and diff tasks concurrently).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant