On 5/02/2016 8:07 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2016-02-04 22:55, Erik Joelsson wrote:
I followed a suggestion from Magnus to compare a devkit build using
the new option with a non devkit build, on a Solaris machine with as
close to a matching install as the sysroot as I could find. The
comparison of libjvm.so is clean according to compare.sh. (Comparing
the sorted list of symbols, dependencies, and disassembly output where
dynamically generated symbols and addresses have been filtered out)
Sounds good.
With this I feel pretty confident about adding the new option.
Me too.
Me three. Thanks for doing the validation work.
David
/Magnus
/Erik
On 2016-02-04 16:56, Erik Joelsson wrote:
A full hotspot run of all solaris targets succeeded with the change.
/Erik
On 2016-02-04 14:51, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Differences are extensive in most C++ object files. The problem with
viewing dissassembly diffs is that any difference tend to change all
addresses later in the file.
/Erik
On 2016-02-04 13:43, Erik Joelsson wrote:
I will investigate and report back.
/Erik
On 2016-02-04 13:29, David Holmes wrote:
On 4/02/2016 9:27 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2016-02-03 14:33, Erik Joelsson wrote:
On 2016-02-03 13:59, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Erik,
On 3/02/2016 10:48 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello,
Please review this small fix for building on Solaris using a
devkit/sysroot. The Solaris Studio compiler does special
inlining and
intrinsics with system calls, like memcpy. The problem is that
it only
seems to do this if it finds the definition of the system call
in a
header file in the /usr/include directory. See bug description
and
comments for details.
I have found a way to work around this. Internally, the
compiler adds
the option -I-xbuiltin to mark the start of the system header
includes
when calling a sub process. By adding this to our
SYSROOT_CFLAGS, the
special inlining is re-enabled.
We have no way of knowing whether that will mess with the
compilers
use of other header files. We seem to be on very thin ice here. We
know it fixes this one problem, but we don't know what else it
may do!
That is true. But then, we don't really know what else this
compiler
is doing anyway, as is evident by your latest discovery. The way we
live with this is testing. We use the setup we have until it proves
not to work, we fix and we test. I'm just trying to do the best
I can
with what we have. I would much prefer to ditch SS for gcc/clang
(where we seem to have way less problems) if it was my choice.
I'm not
ready to give up the convenience of devkits/portable sysroots just
because one of the compilers we (have to) use needs a bit of
special
handling to behave properly.
I agree that this is a situation that's not really comfortable.
:( But,
as with many other things with the solaris studio compiler, in
the end
it's a result of the limited functionality of that compiler (in this
case, the lack of a properly functioning --sysroot alternative).
So in light of that, and Erik's comment about testing as the only
way to
be sure, I'd like to see Eriks fix get in.
Do we have the means to do a binary comparison of the object files
before/after the change to ascertain what kind of affect this is
having?
Thanks,
David
/Magnus
/Erik
