RE: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi Phil/Alexey, thanks for adding the other lists . > Is this the current version of the change : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8201226.2/ ? Yes. Best regards, Matthias > -Original Message- > From: Alexey Ivanov [mailto:alexey.iva...@oracle.com] > Sent:

Re: RFR: 8201274: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs

On 4/13/18 4:15 AM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: Please review an initial implementation for the feature described in JEP 330: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs. The work is described in the JEP and CSR, and falls into various parts:  * The part to handle the new command-line options is in

[11] RFR: 8201507: Generate alias entries in j.t.f.ZoneName from tzdb at build time

Hi, Please review the fix to the subject issue. While fixing 8189784 [1], I noticed that not only CLDR zones but also tzdb link entries are also hard coded. So I further modified j.t.f.ZoneName to generate tzdb entries at the build time. The issue:

Re: RFR: JDK-8201508: Macosx builds fail in GenerateLinkOptData.gmk

Looks good to me. Thanks for fixing this. I didn't think there was anything platform dependent in my fix, so I only tested it locally. :( /Magnus > 12 apr. 2018 kl. 23:28 skrev Erik Joelsson : > > All macosx builds in CI currently fail. This is caused by in issue

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

On 12/04/2018 21:42, Phil Race wrote: How can JNIEXPORT be different between 32 bit & 64 bit ? I'm sure you saw compilation errors but I don't get why it failed for 32 only. JNICALL (_stdcall) may be unnecessary on 64 bit Windows but that doesn't explain why the 32 bit compiler would

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

On 12/04/2018 19:38, Phil Race wrote: I was just directed to this look at this change. I don't know why it is being reviewed exclusively on build-dev since no build files are being changed. My bad! I tried to engage core-libs when the patch was ready but I completely overlooked the fact that

Re: RFR: JDK-8201508: Macosx builds fail in GenerateLinkOptData.gmk

Erik: All macosx builds in CI currently fail. This is caused by in issue with JDK-8201483 which leaves the JVM_VARIANTS_server variable empty. The construct used to subtract one set of strings from another doesn't work quite as expected with bsd grep. result=`$GREP -Fvx "$legal_values" <<<

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

On 12/04/2018 11:33 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2018-04-12 14:15, David Holmes wrote: Hi Magnus, On 12/04/2018 9:39 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: It is currently easy to add new JVM features to the JVM build, but it is not possible to remove features. With this change, features can be

RFR: JDK-8201508: Macosx builds fail in GenerateLinkOptData.gmk

All macosx builds in CI currently fail. This is caused by in issue with JDK-8201483 which leaves the JVM_VARIANTS_server variable empty. The construct used to subtract one set of strings from another doesn't work quite as expected with bsd grep. result=`$GREP -Fvx "$legal_values" <<<

Re: RFR: 8201274: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs

Looks great - some initial comments (I can't really comment on the launcher changes): * This logic is efficient: int magic = (in.read() << 8) + in.read(); boolean shebang = magic == (('#' << 8) + '!'); but convoluted to read; perhaps could be improved slightly by making '#' << 8) + '!' a

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

How can JNIEXPORT be different between 32 bit & 64 bit ? I'm sure you saw compilation errors but I don't get why it failed for 32 only. JNICALL (_stdcall) may be unnecessary on 64 bit Windows but that doesn't explain why the 32 bit compiler would complain about inconsistent application of

Re: RFR: 8201274: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs

On 2018-04-12 22:15, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: Please review an initial implementation for the feature described in JEP 330: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs. The work is described in the JEP and CSR, and falls into various parts:  * The part to handle the new command-line options is in

RFR: 8201274: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs

Please review an initial implementation for the feature described in JEP 330: Launch Single-File Source-Code Programs. The work is described in the JEP and CSR, and falls into various parts: * The part to handle the new command-line options is in the native Java launcher code. * The part

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

I was just directed to this look at this change. I don't know why it is being reviewed exclusively on build-dev since no build files are being changed. 50% of it should have been sent to 2d-dev and the rest on core-libs + hotspot .. Is this the current version of the change :

Re: -Wexpansion-to-defined warnings

Yes, it’s a known issue after upgrade Xcode, https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200550 Cheers, Henry > On Apr 12, 2018, at 11:19 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2018-04-12 19:42, Dan Smith wrote: >> I'm suddenly getting hundreds of these warnings

Re: -Wexpansion-to-defined warnings

On 2018-04-12 19:42, Dan Smith wrote: I'm suddenly getting hundreds of these warnings when I build in macOS: /Users/dan/Dev/jdk/jdk/src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/heapRegionSet.hpp:126:5: warning: macro expansion producing 'defined' has undefined behavior [-Wexpansion-to-defined] #if

-Wexpansion-to-defined warnings

I'm suddenly getting hundreds of these warnings when I build in macOS: /Users/dan/Dev/jdk/jdk/src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/heapRegionSet.hpp:126:5: warning: macro expansion producing 'defined' has undefined behavior [-Wexpansion-to-defined] #if HEAP_REGION_SET_FORCE_VERIFY ^

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

On 2018-04-12 09:53, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: 12 apr. 2018 kl. 17:38 skrev Erik Joelsson : Looks good. Especially adding those # header lines in basics.m4! Thanks! I'm actually thinking about splitting out a utils.m4 from basics.m4, for these kinds of helper

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

> On Apr 12, 2018, at 11:54 21AM, Iris Clark wrote: > > Hi. > > I believe that the internal page Christian references is for the test system. > > If you want to know whether the push arrived in the repository, you could > subscribe to

Re: Invalid use of -m32 on certain targets

> 12 apr. 2018 kl. 15:49 skrev John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > : > > Hi! > > I have been playing around with Zero on new (old) architectures and one > of them is hppa, which needs some additional work due to its stack growing > from bottom to top but that's another

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

> 12 apr. 2018 kl. 17:38 skrev Erik Joelsson : > > Looks good. Especially adding those # header lines in basics.m4! Thanks! I'm actually thinking about splitting out a utils.m4 from basics.m4, for these kinds of helper functions. Sounds ok? > > I guess a future

RE: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi. I believe that the internal page Christian references is for the test system. If you want to know whether the push arrived in the repository, you could subscribe to jdk-submit-chan...@openjdk.java.net. The archive of recent push notifications is public:

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

Looks good. Especially adding those # header lines in basics.m4! I guess a future followup now is to get rid of the individual enable/disable args that are now redundant. /Erik On 2018-04-12 04:39, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: It is currently easy to add new JVM features to the JVM build, but

Re: Invalid use of -m32 on certain targets

Short note, internally at SAP we have a proprietary port for HPUX parisc and yes, upward growing stack is quite a problem. We had to make (and continue to maintain) a lot of downstream changes which deal with that. So I doubt that even if you manage to build the VM would be running for long. Best

Invalid use of -m32 on certain targets

Hi! I have been playing around with Zero on new (old) architectures and one of them is hppa, which needs some additional work due to its stack growing from bottom to top but that's another story. Anyway, adding hppa to platform.m4 and running configure results in the following error message:

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > On 2018-04-12 14:11, Thomas Stüfe wrote: >> >> Hi Magnus, >> >> this is nice. I would like a clearer naming though, that single dash >> is easily overlooked. How about --without-jvm-features instead? > > >

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

On 2018-04-12 14:11, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi Magnus, this is nice. I would like a clearer naming though, that single dash is easily overlooked. How about --without-jvm-features instead? This is not possible. --without-X is internally replaced by autoconf to "--with-X=no". "--without-X=foo" is

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

On 2018-04-12 14:15, David Holmes wrote: Hi Magnus, On 12/04/2018 9:39 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: It is currently easy to add new JVM features to the JVM build, but it is not possible to remove features. With this change, features can be both added or removed from the default set. They

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

> On Apr 12, 2018, at 9:07 48AM, Baesken, Matthias > wrote: > >> Your submit job ran without failures, we were doing maintenance on the jdk- >> submit repo yesterday and had turned off notifications. Sorry for the >> inconvenience. > > Hi Christian , Thanks for the

RE: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

> Your submit job ran without failures, we were doing maintenance on the jdk- > submit repo yesterday and had turned off notifications. Sorry for the > inconvenience. Hi Christian , Thanks for the information about the submit job success. Is there a way to check (e.g. webpage) that a submit

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi Matthias, > On Apr 12, 2018, at 3:49 35AM, Baesken, Matthias > wrote: > > Hi, could someone please sponsor the change now ? > > And could someone please check what happened to the submit-repo ? > Yesterday I pushed to the submit repo to check my

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi Matthias, On 12/04/2018 11:12, Alexey Ivanov wrote: Hi Matthias, On 12/04/2018 08:49, Baesken, Matthias wrote: Hi,  could  someone please  sponsor  the change  now ? According to OpenJDK Census page [1], you have committer rights to JDK project. And  could someone please check  what

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

Hi Magnus, On 12/04/2018 9:39 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: It is currently easy to add new JVM features to the JVM build, but it is not possible to remove features. With this change, features can be both added or removed from the default set. They are added using --with-jvm-features=f1,f2

Re: RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

Hi Magnus, this is nice. I would like a clearer naming though, that single dash is easily overlooked. How about --without-jvm-features instead? ..Thomas On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > It is currently easy to add new JVM features to

Re: [8u] RFR: 8035495: Improvements in autoconf integration AND 8035825

Thanks Magnus.   I'll also be doing the related 8035730.  That's a clean backport so will go straight to 8u-dev group. Thanks Kevin On 12/04/2018 13:05, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: Looks good to me. /Magnus On 2018-04-11 17:38, Kevin Walls wrote: Hi, I'd like to request review of this

Re: [8u] RFR: 8035495: Improvements in autoconf integration AND 8035825

Looks good to me. /Magnus On 2018-04-11 17:38, Kevin Walls wrote: Hi, I'd like to request review of this backport from 9 to 8u: 8035495: Improvements in autoconf integration JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035495 9 changeset: URL:  

Re: slowproduct build

On 2018-04-11 07:12, Ioi Lam wrote: On 4/10/18 2:21 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2018-04-10 23:08, Ioi Lam wrote: Yes that’s what I want. Yesterday I was using gdb to step into the interpreter generation code to see what’s generated for a particular routine for MethodHandles. The

RFR: JDK-8201483 Make it possible to disable JVM features

It is currently easy to add new JVM features to the JVM build, but it is not possible to remove features. With this change, features can be both added or removed from the default set. They are added using --with-jvm-features=f1,f2 and removed using --with-jvm-features=-f1,-f2. The syntax can

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Adding core-libs-dev as this is change code in libjava, libzip, libjimage, ... Can you confirm that this is the up to date webrev:    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8201226.2/ As I read it, this changes the calling convention of these functions on 32-bit Windows but it will have

Re: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi Matthias, On 12/04/2018 08:49, Baesken, Matthias wrote: Hi, could someone please sponsor the change now ? According to OpenJDK Census page [1], you have committer rights to JDK project. And could someone please check what happened to the submit-repo ? Yesterday I pushed to the

Re: slowproduct build

On 04/10/2018 10:21 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > So you want to have a way to force -O0 for all compiled files? Something > like "bash configure --with-debug-level=release > --with-optimization=none", or possibly "make OPTIMIZATION=NONE"? > > Or are you happy with the optimization level of a

RE: 8201226 missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations - was : RE: missing JNIEXPORT / JNICALL at some places in function declarations/implementations

Hi, could someone please sponsor the change now ? And could someone please check what happened to the submit-repo ? Yesterday I pushed to the submit repo to check my change , but no response so far . Maybe the submit repo is not working currently , not sure about it .