Hi David , thanks for forwarding to build-dev + your comments . May I add you as reviewer?
New webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8224214.2/ -adjusted the copyright year in make/autoconf/toolchain.m4 -removed the comment as suggested by you > But that said, if __IBMCPP__ is no longer defined then it seems a fix is > needed in ./share/runtime/vm_version.cpp as well. -removed __IBMCPP__ from share/runtime/vm_version.cpp (more a cleanup than something that is really needed) ; reason is that xlc16/xlclang++ comes with a very rich set of compiler - macros, especially the "usual" clang and GNUC macros are all set ; see : $fgrep GNUC xclangplus.txt #define __GNUC_MINOR__ 2 #define __GNUC_PATCHLEVEL__ 1 #define __GNUC_STDC_INLINE__ 1 #define __GNUC__ 4 $ fgrep clang xclangplus.txt #define __clang__ 1 #define __clang_major__ 4 #define __clang_minor__ 0 #define __clang_patchlevel__ 1 #define __clang_version__ "4.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_401/final)" $ fgrep __VERSION__ xclangplus.txt #define __VERSION__ "IBM XL C/C++ for AIX, Version 16.1.0.1" So we would run into the clang -case in vm_version.cpp and there use the __VERSION__ info that is pretty good IMHO . Best regards, Matthias > > Hi Matthias, > > cc'ing build-dev for build changes. > > But they look fine to me as do the main changes. > > A couple of nits: > > - ensure all copyright headers are updated for 2019 > > - in globalDefinitions_xlc.hpp this comment seems no longer necessary > > // __IBMCPP__ is not defined any more with xlclang++ > > But that said, if __IBMCPP__ is no longer defined then it seems a fix is > needed in ./share/runtime/vm_version.cpp as well. > > Cheers, > David > > On 30/08/2019 1:41 am, Baesken, Matthias wrote: > > Hi Martin, I agree about the m4 files . > > New webrev , this additionally touches toolchain.m4 and flags-cflags.m4 > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8224214.1/ > > > > Thanks, Matthias > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Doerr, Martin <martin.do...@sap.com> > >> Sent: Donnerstag, 29. August 2019 16:19 > >> To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baes...@sap.com>; 'hotspot- > >> d...@openjdk.java.net' <hotspot-...@openjdk.java.net>; 'ppc-aix-port- > >> d...@openjdk.java.net' <ppc-aix-port-...@openjdk.java.net> > >> Subject: RE: RFR: 8224214: [AIX] Remove support for legacy xlc compiler > >> > >> Hi Matthias, > >> > >> nice cleanup. Looks good to me. > >> > >> We can also require availability of xlclang++ in toolchain.m4. I think some > of > >> the changes only work with this compiler. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Martin > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: hotspot-dev <hotspot-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net> On > Behalf > >> Of > >>> Baesken, Matthias > >>> Sent: Donnerstag, 29. August 2019 15:41 > >>> To: 'hotspot-...@openjdk.java.net' <hotspot-...@openjdk.java.net>; > >>> 'ppc-aix-port-...@openjdk.java.net' <ppc-aix-port- > >> d...@openjdk.java.net> > >>> Subject: RFR: 8224214: [AIX] Remove support for legacy xlc compiler > >>> > >>> Hello, please review the following change . > >>> For OpenJDK 13 we've moved to XLC 16 as required compiler. > >>> However we have still a lot of workarounds and checks in the codebase > >> for > >>> the older xlc compilers. > >>> This changes removes such changes . > >>> > >>> Additionally it adjusts the compiler version check in > >>> hotspot/share/utilities/globalDefinitions_xlc.hpp > >>> and 2 typos in os_aix are fixed . > >>> > >>> > >>> When 8224214 was created a while ago , it was discussed on the > mailing > >> list > >>> : > >>> > >>> "we still set some '-qlanglvl' options for C++ which aren't supported by > the > >>> new compiler [xlc16/xlclang++] either" . > >>> Those options generated lots of warnings , so they were removed > >> already > >>> so no need to remove them in this change . > >>> > >>> ( In jdk11 which is built with xlc12 they can still be found : > >>> flags-cflags.m4:540: -qalias=noansi -qstrict -qtls=default > >>> -qlanglvl=c99vla > \ > >>> flags-cflags.m4:541: -qlanglvl=noredefmac -qnortti -qnoeh -qignerrno" > >>> ) > >>> > >>> > >>> Bug/webrev : > >>> > >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224214 > >>> > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8224214.0/ > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, Matthias
