Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v18]

2022-02-03 Thread Tyler Steele
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 17:17:10 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote: >> Tyler Steele has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Edit thread_aix.cpp to match thread_linux.cpp in >> pd_get_top_fram_for_profiling and ...for_signal_handler > > Thanks

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v20]

2022-02-03 Thread Tyler Steele
> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR > functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to OpenJDK >  > > ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered > > After modifying the build system to allow the --enable-jvm-feature-jfr

RFR: 8176706: Additional Date-Time Formats

2022-02-03 Thread Naoto Sato
Following the prior discussion [1], here is the PR for the subject enhancement. CSR has also been updated according to the suggestion. [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2022-January/085175.html - Commit messages: - Removed trailing space - Merge branch

Re: [Ping2?] [8u] RFR: 8210283: Support git as an SCM alternative in the build

2022-02-03 Thread Severin Gehwolf
On Wed, 2021-12-22 at 11:14 +0100, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > On Fri, 2021-12-10 at 15:11 +0100, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Please review this adaptation of the corresponding JDK 11 patch. The > > JDK 11u patch didn't apply because the build system is widely different > > between these

Re: Segfault when building openjdk13 with openjdk12

2022-02-03 Thread Abigail G
On Thu, 2022-02-03 at 12:31 -0500, Abigail G wrote: > On Wed, 2022-02-02 at 12:12 +0300, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > > On 2/2/22 08:53, Abigail G wrote: > > > Whoops, looks like I made the zip wrong, this one should work: > > > https://0x0.st/oHxy.zip > > > > So it looks like a GC crash: > > > > # 

Re: Segfault when building openjdk13 with openjdk12

2022-02-03 Thread Abigail G
On Wed, 2022-02-02 at 12:12 +0300, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > On 2/2/22 08:53, Abigail G wrote: > > Whoops, looks like I made the zip wrong, this one should work: > > https://0x0.st/oHxy.zip > > So it looks like a GC crash: > > #  SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x7fa2ba719208, pid=29539, tid=29557 > >

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v18]

2022-02-03 Thread Alan Hayward
> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One > of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by > signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and > authenticating the value when it is loaded back from the stack. If an > attacker

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v17]

2022-02-03 Thread Alan Hayward
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:03:48 GMT, Alan Hayward wrote: >> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One >> of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by >> signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and >> authenticating the value

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v17]

2022-02-03 Thread Andrew Haley
On Thu, 3 Feb 2022 12:11:16 GMT, Alan Hayward wrote: > As mentioned on the CSR, the JEP is being dropped - unless anyone has any > objections. JDK-8277204 will become a normal RFE. Good decision. - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6334

Re: RFR: 8274980: Improve adhoc build version strings [v4]

2022-02-03 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Current adhoc version build strings are not ideal. Some of the problems: > * A build number of "0" is inserted, which make the version string look like > it's an official build, at least when not reading carefully > * The version string gives little indication on what source code the build >

Re: RFR: 8277204: Implementation of JEP 8264130: PAC-RET protection for Linux/AArch64 [v17]

2022-02-03 Thread Alan Hayward
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 16:03:48 GMT, Alan Hayward wrote: >> PAC is an optional feature in AArch64 8.3 and is compulsory in v9. One >> of its uses is to protect against ROP based attacks. This is done by >> signing the Link Register whenever it is stored on the stack, and >> authenticating the value

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v19]

2022-02-03 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 3 Feb 2022 11:14:19 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote: > Looks good to me, too. I think it is ready for integration assuming all > change requests were taken care of and tests have passed. @TheRealMDoerr we should test the latest version of this patch in our nightlies, just in case

Re: RFR: 8203290: [PPC64, s390] Check functionality of JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder) [v19]

2022-02-03 Thread Martin Doerr
On Wed, 2 Feb 2022 22:42:47 GMT, Tyler Steele wrote: >> Just in time for the holidays I have completed an implementation of the JFR >> functionality for AIX. As a side note, this is my first submission to >> OpenJDK  >> >> ### Implementation notes and alternatives considered >> >> After