Hi Matthias, thanks for working on xlclang++ support.
Seems like we only 2 changes away from C++14 support on AIX: 1. The TOOLCHAIN_CC/CXX_BINARY_xlc change you proposed. 2. Backport the following harfbuzz change: Support xlclang++ on AIX. (#1584) src/java.desktop/share/native/libfontmanager/harfbuzz/hb-atomic-private.hh -#elif !defined(HB_NO_MT) && defined(_AIX) && defined(__IBMCPP__) +#elif !defined(HB_NO_MT) && defined(_AIX) && (defined(__IBMCPP__) || defined(__ibmxl__)) Can you add this tiny harfbuzz backport to your change once the xlC/xlclang++ selection mechanism is clearified? Best regards, Martin -----Original Message----- From: Baesken, Matthias Sent: Freitag, 15. Februar 2019 14:31 To: Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com>; 'build-dev@openjdk.java.net' <build-dev@openjdk.java.net> Cc: Doerr, Martin <martin.do...@sap.com> Subject: RE: RFR : 8218965: aix: support xlclang++ in the compiler detection > > Are they both pointing to the same binary, and the mode of operation > (legacy xlc vs xlclang) is determined by the name of the executable? > Hello, in the installation I use I have separate binaries . > > Is xlclang++ always available for version 16+ of xlc? > I think so, as least I am not aware of an installation mode with separate binaries . However I am not an XLC installation guru 😊 . > > If so, maybe we should just make sure we call the compiler with the > correct name if version 16+ is detected? > I thought that we currently first set the toolchain name and then set a fix name for the binary and check the version . But I might be wrong. Maybe we need to adjust this . Or just at some future point in time declare xlc16 as minimum requirement (this makes things easier , we can then use the new binary names ). Best regards, Matthias > -----Original Message----- > From: Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> > Sent: Freitag, 15. Februar 2019 13:32 > To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baes...@sap.com>; 'build- > d...@openjdk.java.net' <build-dev@openjdk.java.net> > Cc: Doerr, Martin <martin.do...@sap.com> > Subject: Re: RFR : 8218965: aix: support xlclang++ in the compiler detection > > On 2019-02-15 12:53, Baesken, Matthias wrote: > > Hi Magnus, > > > > we are currently able to build (+ test 😊 ) jdk/jdk on AIX with the > xlclang++ based build . > > Only needed are this change , > > plus a one-liner in harfhuzz is needed (we try to get this upstream > > into > harbuzz directly, in case the next harfhuzz update to jdk/jdk is in the > mid/far > future , I would add this one liner to my patch). > > > > So I hope that there will be not so many follow ups (but you never know > ). > > Ok, that's good to hear. > > > >> If so, could the choice between -g ang -g1 be handled with the normal > >> TOOLCHAIN_CHECK_COMPILER_VERSION? > >> > > I'll look into this . Unfortunately the version output is the same for > > both > frontends : > > > > New one: > > > > bash-4.4$ xlclang++ -qversion > > IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, V16.1.0 (some-strange-hex-string) > > Version: 16.01.0000.0001 > > > > Legacy xlc: > > > > bash-4.4$ xlC_r -qversion > > IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, V16.1.0 (some-strange-hex-string) > > Version: 16.01.0000.0001 > > > > > > (and some-strange-hex-string is the same for both) > Hm. > > Are they both pointing to the same binary, and the mode of operation > (legacy xlc vs xlclang) is determined by the name of the executable? > > Is xlclang++ always available for version 16+ of xlc? > > If so, maybe we should just make sure we call the compiler with the > correct name if version 16+ is detected? > > Or is there a way to force xlclang mode using a flag? > > /Magnus >
