No objections from me.
When we plan to switch to GCv5?
SY, Alexey
2007/4/19, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 4/18/07, Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> > Let's wait until the patch from Xiao-Feng is integrated, and if
> > failures disappear and
> > no new failures appear, let's switch our default
> >
>
> Minor suggestion: can we stop committing any updates before switching
> to GCv5? Otherswise it may be hard to understand why tests fails. As I
> understand 5~6 hours is enough for CC to do full testing cycle. So we
> can let CC finish testing cycle with old GC, do switch and see whether
> tests pass or not with new GC.
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > 2007/4/18, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > So how about we switch to GCv5 today as the default? If things look
> > > good then we are all happy, and if new problems are immediately
apparent
> > > we drop back to Old Faithful.
> > >
> > > Best that we get everyone testing on the proposed code asap. Of
course,
> > > anything that misses this milestone can be a candidate for the next
> > > (which we haven't discussed yet, but IMHO should be in 6-8 weeks
time
> > > after M1). It is not a full release.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > Xiao-Feng Li wrote:
> > > > Vladimir, thanks, this is what I observed as well. They are coming
> > > > from a same bug, and the patch will be submitted in one or two
hours,
> > > > so I don't worry about it. :-)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > xiaofeng
> > > >
> > > > On 4/18/07, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> It is just my statistics:
> > > >>
> > > >> WinXP, ia32:
> > > >> Classlib tests: passed
> > > >> DRLVM tests (int+jet+jit+opt modes): list of failed tests:
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Ctor5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Field5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Method5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.ThreadTest;
> > > >> org.apache.harmony.lang.annotation.AllTypesTest
> > > >>
> > > >> Linux, ia32:
> > > >> Classlib tests: java.awt.font.LineBreakMeasurerTest failed
> > > >> DRLVM tests (int+jet+jit+opt modes): list of failed tests:
> > > >> java.lang.ThrowableTest – hang (int mode)
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Ctor5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Field5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Method5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.ThreadTest;
> > > >> org.apache.harmony.lang.annotation.AllTypesTest
> > > >>
> > > >> Linux, em64t:
> > > >> Classlib tests: list of failed tests
> > > >> java.awt.CanvasRTest – hang
> > > >> javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicListUITest - hang
> > > >> javax.swing.JSliderTest
> > > >> javax.swing.JTableRTest
> > > >> javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicFileChooserUITest
> > > >> javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicFormattedTextFieldUITest
> > > >> javax.swing.plaf.basic.BasicIconFactoryTest
> > > >>
> > > >> DRLVM tests (int+jet+jit+opt modes): list of failed tests:
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Ctor5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Field5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.reflect.Method5Test;
> > > >> java.lang.ThreadTest;
> > > >> org.apache.harmony.lang.annotation.AllTypesTest
> > > >> and
> > > >> All JVMTI tests using interpreter
> > > >> -------------
> > > >> SIGSEGV in VM code.
> > > >> Stack trace:
> > > >> 0: jthread_monitor_enter
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/thread/src/thread_java_monitors.c:145)
> > > >>
> > > >> 1: vm_monitor_enter_default
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/thread/mon_enter_exit.cpp:115)
> > > >>
> > > >> 2: vm_monitor_enter_wrapper(ManagedObject*)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/interpreter/interp_imports.cpp:30)
> > > >>
> > > >> 3: Opcode_MONITORENTER(StackFrame&)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/interpreter/src/interpreter.cpp:2277)
> > > >>
> > > >> 4:
> > > >>
org/apache/harmony/fortress/security/SecurityUtils.putContext(Ljava/lang/Thread;Ljava/security/AccessControlContext;)V
> > > >>
> > > >> (SecurityUtils.java:76)
> > > >> 5: interpreterInvokeStatic
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/interpreter/src/interpreter.cpp:3318)
> > > >>
> > > >> 6: Opcode_INVOKESTATIC(StackFrame&)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/interpreter/src/interpreter.cpp:2105)
> > > >>
> > > >> 7:
> > > >>
java/lang/Thread.<init>(Ljava/lang/ThreadGroup;Ljava/lang/String;JJIZ)V
> > > >> (Thread.java:253)
> > > >> 8: interpreter_execute_method(Method*, jvalue*, jvalue*)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/interpreter/src/interpreter.cpp:3211)
> > > >>
> > > >> 9: JIT_execute_method
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/interpreter/src/interp_exports.cpp:167)
> > > >>
> > > >> 10: DrlEMImpl::executeMethod(_jmethodID*, jvalue*, jvalue*)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/em/src/DrlEMImpl.cpp:510)
> > > >>
> > > >> 11: ExecuteMethod
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/em/src/em_intf.cpp:44)
> > > >> 12: vm_execute_java_method_array(_jmethodID*, jvalue*, jvalue*)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jit/ini.cpp:56)
> > > >>
> > > >> 13: vm_create_jthread
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/init/vm_init.cpp:560)
> > > >>
> > > >> 14: vm_attach_internal(JNIEnv_External**, _jobject**,
> > > >> JavaVM_External*, _jobject*, char*, unsigned char)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/init/vm_init.cpp:601)
> > > >>
> > > >> 15: attach_current_thread
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jni/jni.cpp:1519)
> > > >>
> > > >> 16: AttachCurrentThreadAsDaemon(JavaVM_External*, void**, void*)
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/jni/jni.cpp:1548)
> > > >>
> > > >> 17: finalizer_thread_func
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/vmcore/src/init/finalizer_thread.cpp:204)
> > > >>
> > > >> 18: thread_start_proc
> > > >>
(/export/cruise/trunk/cc/projects/drlvm/trunk/vm/thread/src/thread_native_basic.c:716)
> > > >>
> > > >> 19: start_thread (??:-1)
> > > >> <end of stack trace>
> > > >> -------------
> > > >>
> > > >> thanks, Vladimir
> > > >>
> > > >> On 4/18/07, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > I think that we make GCv5 default a week before the milestone
since it
> > > >> > gives us some benefits.
> > > >> > And if we discover any stability or other issues we always can
switch
> > > >> > it back before the milestone.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > SY, Alexey
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 2007/4/18, Rana Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >> > > In addition to specs and eclipse, there are the tests that
come with
> > > >> > > "build test". Are there any more tests we are worried about?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I understand the risk of switching before an event, but we
will have
> > > >> > > to do it at some point. Not much point in writing it and then
not
> > > >> > > using it. Doing it still gives us a few weeks before Java One
to see
> > > >> > > if there are problems. How about running it as default for a
week
> > > >> > > before we decide?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On 4/17/07, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > > > It's quite risky to switch right before the show.
> > > >> > > > Xiao-Feng, what workloads you tried with gcv5 except specs
and
> > > >> eclipse?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > +
> > > >> > > > I'm working on "lazy resolution" task in both JITs now and
going
> > > >> to submit
> > > >> > > > the patch this week for
> > > >> > > > review. I think its commit should be delayed for a few
weeks until
> > > >> > > > JavaOne is finished.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On 4/18/07, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On 4/18/07, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > Do you think we should switch before "end of month"?
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Yes, that's my suggestion.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > It's certainly a risk, but what is the value in the
switch?
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > The risk is minimal since GCv5 is rather stable, and to
the
> > > >> least we
> > > >> > > > > have command line option to switch back; but the value is
> > > >> substantial
> > > >> > > > > since people can have an advanced, scalable, modular,
> > > >> flexible, high
> > > >> > > > > performance GC, which I think both runtime researchers
and
> > > >> users would
> > > >> > > > > like to try, based on my interactions with Harmony users.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > To demo Harmony, GC is one component that we'd like to
have a
> > > >> good
> > > >> > > > > story to tell. GCv5 can tell a good story since it has
> > > >> subsumed almore
> > > >> > > > > all the recent advances in GC area (for stop-the-world
GC),
> > > >> and has a
> > > >> > > > > variable of innovations. Importantly, GCv5 can
differentiate
> > > >> > > > > multi-core platforms with its scalable parallelisms. :-)
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > xiaofeng
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > Mikhail
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > 2007/4/18, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >> > > > > > > GCv5 might be one "major" that we want to put as
default
> > > >> GC in DRLVM.
> > > >> > > > > > > It still has some issues pending, but overall I think
the
> > > >> stability is
> > > >> > > > > > > good enough for a switch next week.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Since GC is designed with good modularity, we can
simply
> > > >> choose which
> > > >> > > > > > > GC implementation to use in command line with
> > > >> > > > > > > '-XX:vm.dlls=the_gc_module.dll(so)". This is neat
that
> > > >> helps the
> > > >> > > > > > > switch a lot: If GCv5 has some problem running a
workload,
> > > >> we can
> > > >> > > > > > > specify -XX:vm.dlls=gc_cc.dll in command line.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > So far the known bugs in GCv5 are not with some
workloads,
> > > >> but related
> > > >> > > > > > > with certain test cases for finalizer and VM
threading.
> > > >> And I think
> > > >> > > > > > > they are going to be resolved before next week.
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > > > > > xiaofeng
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > On 4/16/07, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > >> > > > > > > > Just a reminder, as discussed in various threads,
we
> > > >> shall aim to
> > > >> > > > > > > > produce a solid build for Windows and Linux x86 (at
> > > >> least) at the
> > > >> > > > > end of
> > > >> > > > > > > > next week; so that we have something to demo at
> > > >> ApacheCon and
> > > >> > > > > JavaOne
> > > >> > > > > > > > that is a true reflection of our current
capabilities.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Of course, the Milestone will be simply a snapshot,
> > > >> carrying our
> > > >> > > > > usual
> > > >> > > > > > > > caveats. The idea is that with conference talks
taking
> > > >> place we may
> > > >> > > > > > > > expect a few people to download a build and try it
> > > >> around that time,
> > > >> > > > > so
> > > >> > > > > > > > being in the middle of a major restructuring would
> > > >> potentially do us
> > > >> > > > > an
> > > >> > > > > > > > injustice.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Most commits still seem to be on-going bug fixing,
so
> > > >> that's all
> > > >> > > > > > > > goodness. If you are planning on anything 'major'
> > > >> please ensure
> > > >> > > > > there
> > > >> > > > > > > > is enough time to get it stable, or please wait
until
> > > >> after the
> > > >> > > > > > > > milestone build. Similarly, if there is anything
that
> > > >> is currently
> > > >> > > > > > > > 'broken' that you think really needs fixing for
that
> > > >> stability,
> > > >> > > > > please
> > > >> > > > > > > > shout here on the list.
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > There are still two weeks to go, I think the
paranoia
> > > >> about not
> > > >> > > > > causing
> > > >> > > > > > > > regressions will really kick-in next week :-)
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > >> > > > > > > > Tim
> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com
> > > >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > --
> > > >> > > > > http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > --
> > > >> > > > Mikhail Fursov
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>
