Hi!
I am currently working on fixing JDK-8186578:
Zero fails to build on linux-sparc due to sparc-specific code
One necessary change to be able to fix this bug is to build the
SPARC-specific source memset_with_concurrent_readers_sparc.cpp on
Zero as well. This is necessary because on SPARC,
If you have signed the OCA, you can post your proposed change here and I
or someone else will sponsor it once we agree that it looks good.
/Erik
On 2017-08-30 14:27, Jason Yong wrote:
Thanks Eric,
Is the next step is to get a sponsor for the change or should I post
my proposed change first?
On 2017-08-30 14:02, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hi!
I am currently working on fixing JDK-8186578:
Zero fails to build on linux-sparc due to sparc-specific code
One necessary change to be able to fix this bug is to build the
SPARC-specific source memset_with_concurrent_readers_sparc.cp
On 2017-08-30 15:22, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2017-08-30 14:02, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hi!
I am currently working on fixing JDK-8186578:
Zero fails to build on linux-sparc due to sparc-specific code
One necessary change to be able to fix this bug is to build the
SPARC-specifi
On 08/30/2017 03:22 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
I'm sure it's *possible*. I'm also fairly certain it will be messy. :)
I already guess that.
Unfortunately, the usage of various defines in presence of zero seems
not very well defined. That is, should SPARC be defined alongside ZERO,
or shoul
On 08/30/2017 03:25 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
Would it be painful to duplicate the function in cpu/zero? I realize this
is not elegant, but we don't have a good story for sharing platform-specific
functionality with zero. :(
But then we could also just move it into src/share/vm/gc/shared/,
Hi Eric,
With regards to the OCA I believe IBM has signed a contributors agreement
which should cover me for that.
So here's the mercurial export of the CompileJavaModule.java with my
changes in
Regards,
Jason Yong
CEng MEng MIET
Software Engineer, IBM Runtimes Technology
IBM Hybrid Clo
Hello,
Changing the assignment on COPY, CLEAN and FLAGS variables makes sense,
but please revert the SETUP variables as those are not lists but single
value types.
Otherwise this looks good to me.
/Erik
On 2017-08-30 15:37, Jason Yong wrote:
Hi Eric,
With regards to the OCA I believe IBM
Hi Eric,
I've removed the SETUP changes as requested...
On a side note, I noticed that the attachment got stripped out in the post
to the mailing list. Should I actually be copying and pasting the entire
diff in the message? Its a couple of hundred lines... or is somewhere to
put the attachm
Hello Jason,
I took the liberty of creating an issue for this:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186983
The mailing list server removes attachments. This makes it difficult for
new people to send in their patches until they have an openjdk user so
they can upload to cr.openjdk.java.n
Is the expectation that all of the := will be changed to += for these
variables?
468 jdk.internal.vm.ci_ADD_JAVAC_FLAGS := -parameters -Xlint:-exports
-XDstringConcat=inline
Do the closed makefiles also need to be updated?
On 8/30/17, 10:36 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello Jason,
I took the
Hello,
On 2017-08-30 16:48, Gary Adams wrote:
Is the expectation that all of the := will be changed to += for these
variables?
468 jdk.internal.vm.ci_ADD_JAVAC_FLAGS := -parameters -Xlint:-exports
-XDstringConcat=inline
Good catch! I missed that when just reviewing the patch file.
Do th
Hello!
I started working on fixing OpenJDK on BSD today and already ran into
the first issue which is the configure script being unable to find a
usable toolchain.
This happens because there are no valid toolchains defined for BSD in
common/autoconf/toolchain.m4. Since both clang and gcc are sup
Hi Magnus,
On 30/08/2017 11:25 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2017-08-30 15:22, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2017-08-30 14:02, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
Hi!
I am currently working on fixing JDK-8186578:
Zero fails to build on linux-sparc due to sparc-specific code
One necessary
On 31/08/2017 12:36 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
Hello Jason,
I took the liberty of creating an issue for this:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186983
The mailing list server removes attachments. This makes it difficult for
new people to send in their patches until they have an openjdk
Hi Adrian,
this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I
thought BSD is already buildable).
Best Regards, Thomas
On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:30 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <
glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I started working on fixing OpenJDK on BSD t
On 31/08/2017 4:14 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
Hi Adrian,
this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I
thought BSD is already buildable).
Thomas you beat me to it - on both counts! I too recall others building
for BSD.
David
Best Regards, Thomas
On Wed, Aug 30, 201
Looking through my Mails quick, all mails at bsd-port-dev seem to refer to
jdk8.
toolchain.m4 changed a bit since jdk8. Maybe noone attempted to build jdk10
yet on BSD and
Adrian ran into new errors.
..Thomas
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 8:25 AM, David Holmes
wrote:
> On 31/08/2017 4:14 PM, Thomas
On 2017-08-31 08:25, David Holmes wrote:
On 31/08/2017 4:14 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
Hi Adrian,
this looks fine. Thanks for taking on BSD (I'm a bit confused though, I
thought BSD is already buildable).
Thomas you beat me to it - on both counts! I too recall others
building for BSD.
BSD i
On 08/31/2017 08:41 AM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> Looking through my Mails quick, all mails at bsd-port-dev seem to refer to
> jdk8.
>
> toolchain.m4 changed a bit since jdk8. Maybe noone attempted to build jdk10
> yet on BSD and
> Adrian ran into new errors.
Well, "bsd" is also missing from jdk/sr
20 matches
Mail list logo
