From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Preview: portable dumper Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 09:35:29 -0800 Message-ID: References: <047a67ec-9e29-7e4e-0fb0-24c3e59b5886@dancol.org> <83zikjxt1j.fsf@gnu.org> <8360n6ruzu.fsf@gnu.org> <0839b53b-4607-144f-3746-db054a29c1cd@cs.ucla.edu> <83zikiqdu5.fsf@gnu.org> <834m2orkhn.fsf@gnu.org> <96a00b2f-4012-5e66-9d67-7644039600e2@cs.ucla.edu> <83lgw0pbmv.fsf@gnu.org> <2b4b38b8-9fb0-9fe9-2e1e-823aae7b84b1@cs.ucla.edu> <83a8cfpnlo.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1480613753 1351 195.159.176.226 (1 Dec 2016 17:35:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 17:35:53 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 01 18:35:44 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGq-0007De-4R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 18:35:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57734 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGu-0006PW-02 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:35:48 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44437) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGl-0006MY-QC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:35:42 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGh-0000vM-PQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:35:39 -0500 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3]:32770) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGh-0000v8-Fk; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 12:35:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:Cc:References:To:Subject; bh=Wa0Jr+lY00S6KVNcJPHyoA68TDSgJp6vhQKT+mDX28o=; b=AhY4o0MPbA8cZ304BO2o6tupKp6M8WLE++pZVY1mZw3PZLG9Iaqsou25M7NOOUwdmgNbXQXy3E1reMW5IvARNSbURN4OicwJCGUFav48kT5GnwfQAz/IblJzEF2onTuPDBUS1H2UztfdeGA8LwXK2y61A/MPqicfMMZqHAP8QMe2+7QT1TCju8GEyry9zUMepXCHX1VCPCIz6LRxL4juibsGrUzI2LUlHarQQ8u5IXsWGjOXbLctqiCKRlQyx5EXAPMZx8n7ZoYWCYJG091HXmsKG3ZJJXCMf76+vevnF9qngPc0w9I3vkPeCNnW9sKbqghNM+hbicn12E9OX4i9Vg==; Original-Received: from c-73-140-245-253.hsd1.wa.comcast.net ([73.140.245.253] helo=[192.168.1.173]) by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cCVGg-0003TZ-9Q; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 09:35:34 -0800 In-Reply-To: <83a8cfpnlo.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:209884 Archived-At: On 12/01/2016 09:26 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Cc: dancol@dancol.org, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> From: Paul Eggert >> Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:17 -0800 >> >> Emacs never worked on that platform >> >> Sure it did. Emacs worked until FreeBSD 11, when the arm64 port modernized its memory-management implementation. > > From https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=24892#104 > > Ed Maste wrote: > > arm64 support was first available in a release in FreeBSD 11.0, without sbrk, and sbrk never existed on the stable/11 branch. > > Thanks, I didn't know that. So Emacs has never worked in this environment. > > Doesn't that mean Emacs on arm64 was never available before FreeBSD > 11, and sbrk never existed on FreeBSD/arm64? > >> they removed a certain library function, which happens to be called by unexec. >> >> This was no accident. They removed it because it was producing bogus values, and it didn't reflect how FreeBSD actually allocates memory. > > And they are thinking on bringing it back, see They shouldn't bring it back. Reserving a single region in a process as "the heap" and doling out parts of it via mmap is an inflexible allocation policy. mmap ought to be the only way to get memory from the system.