Thank you very much David:)
2018-03-26 12:38 GMT+08:00 David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200213 > > Sponsoring. > > David > ----- > > > On 26/03/2018 12:50 PM, Ao Qi wrote: >> >> 2018-03-23 18:05 GMT+08:00 David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com>: >>> >>> On 23/03/2018 7:54 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2018-03-23 09:55, David Holmes wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 23/03/2018 6:46 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2018-03-23 06:22, David Holmes wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Thomas, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23/03/2018 2:55 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi David, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> would it not be pragmatic to accept Ao's patch - it looks fine to me >>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> since it certainly would not make matters worse. And let Magnus >>>>>>>> follow up >>>>>>>> with a cleanup change later? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well I hope Magnus's change is forthcoming. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It might be some time still. I'm working on a complete overhaul of all >>>>>> CFLAGS and LDFLAGS, where this is a part of that picture, but I was >>>>>> not >>>>>> planning on addressing just this thing urgently. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I think this patch will do for now. It solves the immediate >>>>>> problem >>>>>> for MIPS, and I can come back and make a cleaner solution later on. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Isn't the best quick fix one that only adds -m64 for x86? I recall a >>>>> report that arm32 is similarly broken. >>>> >>>> >>>> Not really, because this is also needed on some other platforms, at >>>> least >>>> s390x, as I recall. (This was the reason it was originally added.) >>> >>> >>> >>> According to gcc docs there are 4 archs that use m64 and we only care >>> about >>> 2 of them: >>> >>> m64: SPARC Options >>> m64: S/390 and zSeries Options >>> m64: RS/6000 and PowerPC Options >>> m64: i386 and x86-64 Options >>> >>> But you need to know whether you are dealing with S390 or S390x as m64 >>> implies zSeries. >>> >>> Ao will need a sponsor to create a bug etc regardless of which way this >>> goes. >>> >> >> Is it possible to accept my patch first (before a perfect all-platform >> solution is made)? If yes, could someone help to create a bug etc? >> Thanks! >> >>> My week is over. :) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> David >>> >>> >>>> /Magnus >>>> >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> ----- >>>>> >>>>>>> AFAICS it's as easy to write this only for x86 as it is to exclude it >>>>>>> for non x86. Honestly I don't know why the Aarch64 patch was done the >>>>>>> way it >>>>>>> was - there must be some subtlety here that I'm not aware of. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it was just the smallest patch that worked for the aarch64 >>>>>> platform. I didn't spend time arguing about the fix, since it is >>>>>> supposed to >>>>>> be short-lived anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> /Magnus >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
