Inline-Lua

 view release on metacpan or  search on metacpan

ffi/target/release/build/mlua-sys-6a99a2ae50f12319/out/luajit-build/build/dynasm/dynasm.lua  view on Meta::CPAN

-- Helper for definesubst.
local gotsubst

local function definesubst_one(word)
  local subst = map_def[word]
  if subst then gotsubst = word; return subst else return word end
end

-- Iteratively substitute defines.
local function definesubst(stmt)
  -- Limit number of iterations.
  for i=1,100 do
    gotsubst = false
    stmt = gsub(stmt, "#?[%w_]+", definesubst_one)
    if not gotsubst then break end
  end
  if gotsubst then wfatal("recursive define involving `"..gotsubst.."'") end
  return stmt
end

-- Dump all defines.

ffi/target/release/build/mlua-sys-6a99a2ae50f12319/out/luajit-build/build/src/lj_mcode.c  view on Meta::CPAN

  /* Use the middle of the 256MB-aligned region. */
  uintptr_t target = ((uintptr_t)(void *)lj_vm_exit_handler &
		      ~(uintptr_t)0x0fffffffu) + 0x08000000u;
#else
  uintptr_t target = (uintptr_t)(void *)lj_vm_exit_handler & ~(uintptr_t)0xffff;
#endif
  const uintptr_t range = (1u << (LJ_TARGET_JUMPRANGE-1)) - (1u << 21);
  /* First try a contiguous area below the last one. */
  uintptr_t hint = J->mcarea ? (uintptr_t)J->mcarea - sz : 0;
  int i;
  /* Limit probing iterations, depending on the available pool size. */
  for (i = 0; i < LJ_TARGET_JUMPRANGE; i++) {
    if (mcode_validptr(hint)) {
      void *p = mcode_alloc_at(J, hint, sz, MCPROT_GEN);

      if (mcode_validptr(p) &&
	  ((uintptr_t)p + sz - target < range || target - (uintptr_t)p < range))
	return p;
      if (p) mcode_free(J, p, sz);  /* Free badly placed area. */
    }
    /* Next try probing 64K-aligned pseudo-random addresses. */

ffi/target/release/build/mlua-sys-6a99a2ae50f12319/out/luajit-build/build/src/lj_opt_loop.c  view on Meta::CPAN

** defined before its use.
**
** This aproach generates two code sections, separated by the LOOP
** instruction:
**
** 1. The recorded instructions form a kind of pre-roll for the loop. It
** contains a mix of invariant and variant instructions and performs
** exactly one loop iteration (but not necessarily the 1st iteration).
**
** 2. The loop body contains only the variant instructions and performs
** all remaining loop iterations.
**
** On first sight that looks like a waste of space, because the variant
** instructions are present twice. But the key insight is that the
** pre-roll honors the control-dependencies for *both* the pre-roll itself
** *and* the loop body!
**
** It also means one doesn't have to explicitly model control-dependencies
** (which, BTW, wouldn't help LICM much). And it's much easier to
** integrate sparse snapshotting with this approach.
**

ffi/target/release/build/mlua-sys-6a99a2ae50f12319/out/luajit-build/build/src/lj_opt_loop.c  view on Meta::CPAN

** But in general all optimizations can be applied which only need to look
** backwards into the generated instruction stream. At any point in time
** during the copy-substitution process this contains both a static loop
** iteration (the pre-roll) and a dynamic one (from the to-be-copied
** instruction up to the end of the partial loop body).
**
** Since control-dependencies are implicitly kept, CSE also applies to all
** kinds of guards. The major advantage is that all invariant guards can
** be hoisted, too.
**
** Load/store forwarding works across loop iterations, too. This is
** important if loop-carried dependencies are kept in upvalues or tables.
** E.g. 'self.idx = self.idx + 1' deep down in some OO-style method may
** become a forwarded loop-recurrence after inlining.
**
** Since the IR is in SSA form, loop-carried dependencies have to be
** modeled with PHI instructions. The potential candidates for PHIs are
** collected on-the-fly during copy-substitution. After eliminating the
** redundant ones, PHI instructions are emitted *below* the loop body.
**
** Note that this departure from traditional SSA form doesn't change the