To allow for better testing of JVMCI support on AArch64 in aid of producing a
reliable GraalVM release on this platform, it should be included by default.
-
Commit messages:
- 8252709: Enable JVMCI when building linux-aarch64 at Oracle
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull
On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 20:15:33 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> To allow for better testing of JVMCI support on AArch64 in aid of producing a
> reliable GraalVM release on this platform, it should be included by default.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 29c72631
Author:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 17:41:05 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Marked as reviewed by iignatyev (Reviewer).
>
> Thank you, Igor. I filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8265032
We would definitely like to be able to continue testing of GraalVM with the JDK
set of jtreg tests. So keeping `C
On Sun, 11 Apr 2021 10:25:47 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
>> Vladimir Kozlov has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contain
On Mon, 12 Apr 2021 22:10:06 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> As part of [JEP 410](http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/410) remove code related
>> to Java-based JIT compiler (Graal) from JDK:
>>
>> - `jdk.internal.vm.compiler` — the Graal compiler
>> - `jdk.internal.vm.compiler.management` — Graal's `M
This PR updates the configuration files used to develop the JVMCI Java and C++
sources with mx and Eclipse.
-
Commit messages:
- 8252600: [JVMCI] update JVMCI code style and mx configuration
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3559/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:37:08 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> This PR updates the configuration files used to develop the JVMCI Java and
> C++ sources with mx and Eclipse.
Until we have downstream repos for JDK 17, it's very handy to have this config
in the JDK. I've tried to keep
While porting [JDK-8224974](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224974)
to Graal, I noticed that new CPU features were defined for x86 and AArch64
without being exposed via JVMCI. To avoid this problem in future, this PR
updates x86 and AArch64 to define CPU features with a single macro th
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:18:31 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> While porting [JDK-8224974](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224974)
> to Graal, I noticed that new CPU features were defined for x86 and AArch64
> without being exposed via JVMCI. To avoid this problem in future
> This PR updates the configuration files used to develop the JVMCI Java and
> C++ sources with mx and Eclipse.
Doug Simon has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences compared
to the previous cont
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 20:17:14 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
>> This PR removes the mx configuration files in the JDK as they do not really
>> belong here. Instead, I've updated and moved them to
>> https://github.com/dougxc/mx_jdk.
>
> Doug Simon has refreshed the conte
ith a single macro that is
> used to generate enum declarations as well as vmstructs entries.
>
> In addition, the JVMCI API is updated to exposes the new CPU feature
> constants and now has a check that ensure these constants are in sync with
> the underlying macro definition.
ith a single macro that is
> used to generate enum declarations as well as vmstructs entries.
>
> In addition, the JVMCI API is updated to exposes the new CPU feature
> constants and now has a check that ensure these constants are in sync with
> the underlying macro definition.
D
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:37:08 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> This PR removes the mx configuration files in the JDK as they do not really
> belong here. Instead, I've updated and moved them to
> https://github.com/dougxc/mx_jdk.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 5
On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 07:32:07 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> This PR removes the mx configuration files in the JDK as they do not really
>> belong here. Instead, I've updated and moved them to
>> https://github.com/dougxc/mx_jdk.
>
> Are you sure it make sense to have this dev config in the openjdk
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:57:37 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Doug Simon has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences
>> compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request co
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:58:46 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Doug Simon has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences
>> compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request co
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 19:00:09 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Doug Simon has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences
>> compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request co
ith a single macro that is
> used to generate enum declarations as well as vmstructs entries.
>
> In addition, the JVMCI API is updated to exposes the new CPU feature
> constants and now has a check that ensure these constants are in sync with
> the underlying macro definition.
On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 20:01:46 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Doug Simon has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - updated date in copyright
>> - added blank lines after macros
>
> You need re
On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 20:18:31 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> While porting [JDK-8224974](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224974)
> to Graal, I noticed that new CPU features were defined for x86 and AArch64
> without being exposed via JVMCI. To avoid this problem in future
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 19:07:45 GMT, Igor Ignatyev wrote:
> > I guess this should really be named `isJVMCICompilerEnabled` now and the
> > `vm.graal.enabled` predicate renamed to `vm.jvmcicompiler.enabled` but
> > maybe that's too big a change (or can be done later).
>
> @dougxc, I don't think th
On Thu, 13 May 2021 16:37:38 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> [JDK-8264806](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8264806) changes
> removed sources and also removed JVMCI compiler from list of upgradable
> modules. JVMCI compiler modules should be upgradable in JDK to work with
> GraalVM.
>
[JDK-8275645](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275645), resulted in
the loose of single-copy atomicity for reads in c2v_readFieldValue. This PR
fixes that by using the `_field_acquire` accessors for all aligned reads
in c2v_readFieldValue and only using the `_field` accessors for unalig
On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:33:27 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
> [JDK-8275645](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8275645) resulted in
> loosing single-copy atomicity for reads in `c2v_readFieldValue`. This PR
> fixes that by using `_field_acquire` accessors for all aligned reads
> an
On Tue, 26 Oct 2021 05:20:22 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Isn't the title of this issue expressed incorrectly?
Yes - thanks for pointing that out.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6109
> On 19 Jun 2018, at 23:00, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Please always include build-dev when reviewing build changes.
>
> In general this looks pretty good but there are some details that need fixing.
>
> (Aside from this particular review, I must state my reservation against all
>
> On 22 Jun 2018, at 23:16, Ekaterina Pavlova
> wrote:
>
> Erik, Doug,
>
> thank you a lot for your reviews and advises.
> I fixed everything what Erik has pointed out, please see my answers inlined.
> As about moving more staff in 'updategraalinopenjdk' can we consider this as
> next step?
> On 22 Jun 2018, at 23:29, Doug Simon wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 22 Jun 2018, at 23:16, Ekaterina Pavlova
>> wrote:
>>
>> Erik, Doug,
>>
>> thank you a lot for your reviews and advises.
>> I fixed everything what Erik has pointed out,
> On 7 Aug 2018, at 08:07, Ekaterina Pavlova
> wrote:
>
> Vladimir, thanks for prompt review.
>
> I can revert the changes and add -XDstringConcat=inline to JAVAC flags for
> all tests.
> I did it only for org/graalvm/compiler/core/test/VerifyDebugUsageTest.java
> because
> Doug was not su
If I understand correctly, this disables building jvmci/graal/aot in *any*
linux-aarch64 jib based build, not just those done at Oracle. Wouldn’t this be
better done on the jib command line?
-Doug
> On 29 Apr 2020, at 06:12, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
>
>
> Please review this small change which
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I wasn’t sure if external parties had managed
to set up a jib server but it sounds like that’s not so easy in practice.
-Doug
> On 29 Apr 2020, at 11:02, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
> On 2020-04-29 10:45, Doug Simon wrote:
>> If I un
On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 15:00:47 GMT, Bernhard Urban-Forster
wrote:
> Use r18 as allocatable register on Linux only.
>
> A bootstrap works now (it has been crashing before due to r18 being
> allocated):
> $
> ./windows-aarch64-server-fastdebug/bin/java.exe
> -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+
d (second number) [current
> --with-version-security Set version 'SECURITY' field (third number) [current
> --with-version-patchSet version 'PATCH' field (fourth number) [not
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
> PS: the correct list for build related questions is
> On 24 Oct 2016, at 23:24, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 24, 2016, at 3:48 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>
>> Adding build-dev, which should be included when discussing build issues. For
>> any new readers, please see [1] for the full discussion.
>> In theory it is possible to compil
> On 27 Oct 2016, at 20:12, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>
> On 10/27/16 10:55 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 27, 2016, at 2:40 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2016-10-27 02:45, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
AOT JEP:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166089
>>
> On 8 Dec 2016, at 13:50, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
> On 2016-12-07 23:10, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166417
>>
>> It is part of JEP 295: Ahead-of-Time Compilation
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166089
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.ne
> On 9 Dec 2016, at 08:07, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>
> Thank you, Mandy
>
> On 12/8/16 7:46 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>
>>> On Dec 7, 2016, at 2:10 PM, Vladimir Kozlov
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166417
>>>
>>> It is part of JEP 295: Ahead-of-Time Compilation
> On 2 Feb 2017, at 13:07, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
> When building with Solaris Studio 12u4, linking of unpack200 fails. The fix
> is to include "environ" in the mapfile.
>
> This patch is contributed by Douglas Simon.
For full disclosure, the original patch and discovery was by Stefan
Just to note here, this means an external version of Graal will now have to use
--add-exports VM options to access JVMCI. Which is ok since additional VM
options are required anyway to put an external Graal on the module path.
-Doug
> On 16 Feb 2017, at 08:54, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
>
from the qualified exports of JVMCI to jdk.vm.compiler.
-Doug
> On 2/16/17 2:01 AM, Doug Simon wrote:
>> Just to note here, this means an external version of Graal will now have to
>> use --add-exports VM options to access JVMCI. Which is ok since additional
>> VM options a
> On 19 May 2017, at 11:15, Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
>
>
> On 2017-05-19 09:15, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Magnus,
>>
>> On 18/05/2017 8:06 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-05-18 09:35, David Holmes wrote:
On 18/05/2017 5:32 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> On 201
ed through the cracks...
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 6/02/2014 9:20 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>>>> This code review request is going to three different aliases.
>>>> Don&
43 matches
Mail list logo
