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

Remove x86_32 support from Dolphin. #428

Merged
merged 10 commits into from Aug 4, 2014

Conversation

Sonicadvance1
Copy link
Contributor

This removes all the code needed to support x86_32 in the project.
The only uses of _M_X86(outside of common) are now the parts that require it.

Common is untouched due to multiple other projects using these files and we have no reason to alienate other projects from upstreaming their changes to us.

@Tilka
Copy link
Member

Tilka commented May 28, 2014

lgtm

@delroth
Copy link
Member

delroth commented May 28, 2014

I would remove support from Common/ as well. People might use it outside our project, but maintaining x86 support is not a promise I want to make for Common/.

@neobrain
Copy link
Member

How many x86 specific features do we have in Common, and how hard to maintain are they really?

@delroth
Copy link
Member

delroth commented May 28, 2014

Probably some code in the x64Emitter at least.

@delroth
Copy link
Member

delroth commented May 28, 2014

As to how hard they are to maintain: near-impossible if we can't run anything that uses them.

@BhaaLseN
Copy link
Member

Do we want to name things neutrally too now? Things like log64.txt or Jit64/Jit64IL, where we don't have any xxx32 anymore (talking about mostly strings, not class names etc).

#pragma comment(linker,"/manifestdependency:\"type='win32' name='Microsoft.Windows.Common-Controls' version='6.0.0.0' processorArchitecture='x86' publicKeyToken='6595b64144ccf1df' language='*'\"")

#elif defined _M_IA64
#if defined _M_IA64

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@shuffle2
Copy link
Contributor

The Win32 target should also be removed from all vs build files.

@delroth
Copy link
Member

delroth commented May 28, 2014

No for Jit64 because we have JitARM and JitARMIL.

On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 6:52 PM, BhaaL notifications@github.com wrote:

Do we want to name things neutrally too now? Things like log64.txt or
Jit64/Jit64IL, where we don't have any xxx32 anymore.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/428#issuecomment-44434451
.

Pierre "delroth" Bourdon delroth@gmail.com
Software Engineer @ Zürich, Switzerland
http://code.delroth.net/

@Sonicadvance1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Most of the code for x86_32 support in common is in the Emitter, ABI, and CPU Detect files.

@Sonicadvance1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Are we even considered the upstream project for the things in Common anymore? PPSSPP seems to be much more popular than we are.

@Tilka
Copy link
Member

Tilka commented Jun 3, 2014

Are we even considered the upstream project for the things in Common anymore? PPSSPP seems to be much more popular than we are.

@hrydgard: ^ ?

@hrydgard
Copy link
Contributor

hrydgard commented Jun 3, 2014

:) Dunno if there's an upstream really, more like side by side.

My one objection to this is that this precludes Dolphin from supporting current 32-bit x86 Android devices, some of which may be strong enough to run at least simpler games ok. Although I have no test results to confirm that, heh, other than PPSSPP running fairly well on a weirdo x86 tablet I have.

@delroth
Copy link
Member

delroth commented Jun 3, 2014

Dolphin x86 support has been decided ages ago, the discussion is mostly
about Common/. I'm pretty sure nobody will want to implement cr-opts for
JIT32 anyway, that should be the first "big" change that has no 32 bit
support.

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Henrik Rydgård notifications@github.com
wrote:

:) Dunno if there's an upstream really, more like side by side.

My one objection to this is that this precludes Dolphin from supporting
current x86 Android devices, some of which may be strong enough to run at
least simpler games ok. Although I have no test results to confirm that,
heh, other than PPSSPP running fairly well on a weirdo x86 tablet I have.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#428 (comment).

Pierre "delroth" Bourdon delroth@gmail.com
Software Engineer @ Zürich, Switzerland
http://code.delroth.net/

@Sonicadvance1
Copy link
Contributor Author

There aren't any x86 Android devices that support GLES3.

@hrydgard
Copy link
Contributor

hrydgard commented Jun 4, 2014

Alright, I'll shut up then :) I wouldn't be surprised if the next round of Intel tablets do though, but hopefully they will run 64-bit Android (which I really hope makes a showing at Google I/O on Jun 25...)

@shuffle2
Copy link
Contributor

been a while, poke?

@neobrain
Copy link
Member

@dolphin-emu-bot rebuild

@neobrain
Copy link
Member

Apparently needs a rebase.

@shuffle2
Copy link
Contributor

My poke was with respect to also cleaning up the VS files.

@Sonicadvance1
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased on latest master!

@Tilka
Copy link
Member

Tilka commented Jul 31, 2014

@Sonicadvance1 ping

@lioncash
Copy link
Member

lioncash commented Aug 3, 2014

Looks good to me

delroth added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2014
Remove x86_32 support from Dolphin.
@delroth delroth merged commit 4c42b38 into dolphin-emu:master Aug 4, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
8 participants