Re: [PATCH] JDK-8167368 Leftover: get_source.sh in build documentation

Also s/forest/repository/ David On 14/11/2018 4:30 am, Erik Joelsson wrote: Good catch, that should indeed be corrected. I would also remove the "all repositories" part. Something like: "Run `hg pull -u` to make sure you have the latest changes." /Erik On 2018-11-12 12:45, Sergey wrote:

Re: RFR: 8213569: Bump minimum boot jdk to JDK 11

Please see the following email: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-dev/2018-April/001075.html Cheers, Mikael > On Nov 13, 2018, at 4:33 PM, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > > Hi, > > Will the boot JDK keep bumping with

Re: RFR: 8213569: Bump minimum boot jdk to JDK 11

Hi, Will the boot JDK keep bumping with each new release? Or will it stay at JDK 11 until the next LTS? Emmanuel Bourg Le 14/11/2018 à 01:07, Mikael Vidstedt a écrit : > > Thanks for the reviews. Pushed. > > Cheers, > Mikael > >> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> >>

Re: RFR: 8213569: Bump minimum boot jdk to JDK 11

Thanks for the reviews. Pushed. Cheers, Mikael > On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > Looks good. > > /Erik > > On 2018-11-11 23:30, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: >> Please review this change which bumps the minimum boot jdk to JDK 11 (see >> [1] for Boot-JDK policy). >> >>

Re: RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

Looks good, thanks a lot for fixing this! Cheers, Mikael > On Nov 13, 2018, at 2:19 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > I didn't know. Updated references to SPARC. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8211727/webrev.02/ > > /Erik > > On 2018-11-13 14:10, Tim Bell wrote: >> Erik: >> >> One

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

On 11/13/18, 12:52 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: Hi, There are enough files unique to each platform to put them in separate packages otherwise you get too many (IMHO) files in a single package/directory and its harder to tell which go with which. There isn't much of a problem with classes

Re: RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

Erik: Looks good. Thanks. Tim I didn't know. Updated references to SPARC. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8211727/webrev.02/ /Erik On 2018-11-13 14:10, Tim Bell wrote: Erik: One nit: for trademark purposes SPARC is used in upper case [1]. Looks good otherwise. Tim [1] Aside from

Re: RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

I didn't know. Updated references to SPARC. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8211727/webrev.02/ /Erik On 2018-11-13 14:10, Tim Bell wrote: Erik: One nit: for trademark purposes SPARC is used in upper case [1]. Looks good otherwise. Tim [1] Aside from appearing lowercase in URLs, it

Re: RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

Erik: One nit: for trademark purposes SPARC is used in upper case [1]. Looks good otherwise. Tim [1] Aside from appearing lowercase in URLs, it seems: https://sparc.org/trademark-usage-guide https://www.oracle.com/servers/sparc/ This patch changes the formula for default test

Re: RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

Hi Erik, Looks good, thanks for fixing this. Thanks, Christian > On Nov 13, 2018, at 1:34 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > This patch changes the formula for default test concurrency in RunTest.gmk. > The current formula is: > > min(cpus/2, 12) > > This seems to work well enough on the x64

RFR: JDK-8211727: Adjust default concurrency settings for running tests on Sparc

This patch changes the formula for default test concurrency in RunTest.gmk. The current formula is: min(cpus/2, 12) This seems to work well enough on the x64 machines we currently run our tests on, but less so for Sparc. I have now run rather extensive testing in our lab and have come up

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

Hi, There are enough files unique to each platform to put them in separate packages otherwise you get too many (IMHO) files in a single package/directory and its harder to tell which go with which.  There isn't much of a problem with classes being public because they are all in a module and

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

I agree with this and would take it further. 1 file is in ./share/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal/builders - why not just ./share/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal 2 files are in ./share/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal/bundlers - why not just in ./share/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal 1 file is

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

Question .. why is "mac", "linux" and "windows" necessary in the package name here ?  src/jdk.jpackager/macosx/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal/mac/MacAppBundler.java   src/jdk.jpackager/windows/classes/jdk/jpackager/internal/builders/windows/WindowsAppImageBuilder.java

Re: jdk HEAD fails to build?

On Tue, 2018-11-13 at 09:44 -0800, Erik Joelsson wrote: > I'm able to reproduce this when setting LOG=debug. Thanks for checking, Erik. Cheers, Severin > /Erik > > On 2018-11-13 09:17, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi Erik, > > > > On Tue, 2018-11-13 at 09:06 -0800, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > >

Re: RFR: 8213622 - Windows VS2013 build failure - "'snprintf': identifier not found"

> On Nov 12, 2018, at 4:11 PM, JC Beyler wrote: > > Hi all, > > I created this change instead: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8213622/webrev.00/ test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/share/jni/ExceptionCheckingJniEnv.cpp 80 full_message[len] = '\0’; That should be 80

Re: [PATCH] JDK-8167368 Leftover: get_source.sh in build documentation

Good catch, that should indeed be corrected. I would also remove the "all repositories" part. Something like: "Run `hg pull -u` to make sure you have the latest changes." /Erik On 2018-11-12 12:45, Sergey wrote: Hi, I'm not sure if that's the right mailing list, however, I'll try. Recently,

Re: [PATCH] Add optimization flags for ARM926EJ-S

Hi Boris, (1) I can try to measure the load time for java -version. I guess the best way to benchmark it would be JMH, but I'm not sure where the effect would be the biggest (this is more or less a premature optimization). (2) I don't think they are widely used nowadays. Texas Instruments has

[PATCH] JDK-8167368 Leftover: get_source.sh in build documentation

Hi, I'm not sure if that's the right mailing list, however, I'll try. Recently, when I was taking a closer look at build documentation: * doc/building.html * doc/building.md I've noticed there get_source.sh being mentioned. I believe that's a leftover of JEP-296 Consolidate JDK Forest into a

Re: jdk HEAD fails to build?

I'm able to reproduce this when setting LOG=debug. /Erik On 2018-11-13 09:17, Severin Gehwolf wrote: Hi Erik, On Tue, 2018-11-13 at 09:06 -0800, Erik Joelsson wrote: Have you tried after pulling in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213338? Yes, I have that. I've got it narrowed down

Re: RFR(S): 8213698: Improve devkit creation and add support for linux/ppc64/ppc64le/s390x

Hello Volker, I think your changes look reasonable and I'm happy to see some external interest in the devkits! To provide some history on the structure of these makefiles. They used to support building full cross toolchains from and to all listed platforms (creating one mega kit for each

Re: jdk HEAD fails to build?

Hi Erik, On Tue, 2018-11-13 at 09:06 -0800, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Have you tried after pulling in > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213338? Yes, I have that. I've got it narrowed down to:

Re: RFR: 8213569: Bump minimum boot jdk to JDK 11

Looks good. /Erik On 2018-11-11 23:30, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: Please review this change which bumps the minimum boot jdk to JDK 11 (see [1] for Boot-JDK policy). bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213569 webrev:

Re: jdk HEAD fails to build?

Have you tried after pulling in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213338? /Erik On 2018-11-12 03:09, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Mon, 2018-11-12 at 10:52 +, Andrew Haley wrote: On 11/12/2018 10:41 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: make/Main.gmk:1056: *** target pattern contains no '%'.

Re: RFR(S): 8213698: Improve devkit creation and add support for linux/ppc64/ppc64le/s390x

As it seems that nobody has looked at this until now, I take the liberty to slightly update my proposal :) http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2018/8213698.v1/ - add the Fedora version to the sub-directory under build/devkit/download/rpms/ which contains the target specific .rpm files.

Re: RFR: 8213591 : running bin/idea.sh in Cygwin: generated project cannot be imported - was : RE: bin/idea.sh and Cygwin

Hi Thomas, thanks for offering a sponsoring. @Matthias: can you please test this patch, so we can commit? On 11/12/18 7:16 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi Michal, I can sponsor for you. @Matthias: yould you test on your Box too if this patch works? Best Regards, Thomas On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

On 11/13/2018 3:39 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 12/11/2018 21:40, Philip Race wrote:   74   75 static String getTmpDir() {   76 String os = System.getProperty("os.name").toLowerCase();   77 if (os.contains("win")) {   78 return System.getProperty("user.home")   79 

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

Yes - The intent of getTmpDir() here is to match the GetTempDirectory() in launcher, which this does for the three supported platforms, but there is no need to check for the unsupported platforms. I will clean this up as you suggest as part ofJDK-8213756

Re: [PATCH] Add optimization flags for ARM926EJ-S

Hi Jakub, I am not against this patch, but I have a few concerns. (1) For me motivation "might increase performance a little bit" is not quite clear. It would be better to have some confidence. (2) Is the particular CPU highly distributed? I am not sure anybody else will get benefit from

Re: RFR: 8213622 - Windows VS2013 build failure - "'snprintf': identifier not found"

Hi, On 11/13/18 1:08 AM, JC Beyler wrote: Hi all, @Mark: good point, fixed in the new webrev @David: also good point, just because originally it was written differently and I moved the code to this format and didn't move the +1 to the "right" spot @Michal: do you mind if I take over the bug

Re: RFR: JDK-8212780: JEP 343: Packaging Tool Implementation

On 12/11/2018 21:40, Philip Race wrote:   74   75 static String getTmpDir() {   76 String os = System.getProperty("os.name").toLowerCase();   77 if (os.contains("win")) {   78 return System.getProperty("user.home")   79 +