Am 01.10.2011 23:25, schrieb Stefan Weil:
> Am 01.10.2011 18:54, schrieb Andreas Färber:
>> Am 17.09.2011 22:00, schrieb Stefan Weil:
>>> +The bytecode consists of opcodes (same numeric values as those used by
>>> +TCG), command length and arguments of variable size and number.
>>
>> While reusing
Am 01.10.2011 18:54, schrieb Andreas Färber:
Am 17.09.2011 22:00, schrieb Stefan Weil:
Unlike other tcg target code generators, this one does not generate
machine code for some cpu. It generates machine independent bytecode
which is interpreted later.
This allows running QEMU on any host.
Inte
Am 17.09.2011 22:00, schrieb Stefan Weil:
> Unlike other tcg target code generators, this one does not generate
> machine code for some cpu. It generates machine independent bytecode
> which is interpreted later.
>
> This allows running QEMU on any host.
>
> Interpreted bytecode is slower than dire
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 10:03:07AM +, Blue Swirl wrote:
> I was wondering if this #ifdeffery is needed since TCI would probably
> give more performance compared to the alternative, TCG generated
> emulation sequences. But it could be useful for testing those. Maybe
> there should be two option
Unlike other tcg target code generators, this one does not generate
machine code for some cpu. It generates machine independent bytecode
which is interpreted later.
This allows running QEMU on any host.
Interpreted bytecode is slower than direct execution of generated
machine code.
Signed-off-by
