On Mon, 15 Aug 2022 17:18:54 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Good stuff. Actually, let me see how easy it is to implement the `nofast_*` >>> bytecodes in Zero, so we don't have to do the shared-code exceptions for it. >> >> That took some debugging :) But here it is, applied on top of your PR: >> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8290981/zero-cds-nofast-1.patch -- builds >> Linux x86_64 Zero fine, this includes using the Zero VM to compile parts of >> JDK. I can do more testing later, we should at least test it bootcycles well. > >> > Good stuff. Actually, let me see how easy it is to implement the >> > `nofast_*` bytecodes in Zero, so we don't have to do the shared-code >> > exceptions for it. >> >> That took some debugging :) But here it is, applied on top of your PR: >> https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8290981/zero-cds-nofast-1.patch -- builds >> Linux x86_64 Zero fine, this includes using the Zero VM to compile parts of >> JDK. I can do more testing later, we should at least test it bootcycles well. > > Passes Linux x86_64 fastdebug Zero `make bootcycle-images` too. @shipilev thanks for sending the patch. I've integrated it. I ran all the tests under test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/cds/appcds. They all passed after I fixed two of the test cases. Do you know how much testing is done by the community with zero? We don't test it that much in our pipeline. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9869
