undefined | Better HN

0 pointsSomeoneFromCA2y ago0 comments

GCJs implementation could be so vastly different from Hotspot, you could as well rewrite it in C and check if it is failing or not. ChatGPT would generate testcase within a minute.

It all depends how good you are with x64 assembly. If you are good enough, you can easily deduce what the instructions at the location do, and can potentially simply copy-paste into an asm file, compile it and check result. Would be much faster to me.

Bluntly speaking, people who are not familiar with low-level debugging make an honest and succesful attempt to investigate a low-level issue. A seasoned kernel developer or reverse engineer would have just used gdb straight away.

0 comments

MertsA2y ago

>A seasoned kernel developer

I think you should take another look at the author list. Chris Mason counts as a seasoned kernel developer in my book. Either way I think you're missing the point. Yes gcj would be different, but there's a decent chance it could hand you a binary that reproduces the issue that you can bisect to the root cause from there. It's one thing to run it through gcj and see if it reproduces, rewriting it in C is a ton of work compared to gcj for something that might not pan out.

SomeoneFromCAOP2y ago

I am not missing the point, as I do not believe in authorities and someone else's evaluations of skill level of yet another person. To rewrite a simple exponentiation in C would not cause "lots of work", and pinpointing the culprit, the exponentiation does not require any gdb debugging and disassembling. In fact, just knowing that exponentiation has caused that suggests faulty hardware and not further investigation required.

You should probably invite these people themselves to the discussion instead of speaking on their behalf. Not productive.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse