On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:09:58 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated,
>> and no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our
>> jtreg tests, which assume these are present.
>>
>> The solution is fortunately simpl
On Tue, 9 Sep 2025 13:15:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> In the static JDK image, a single humongous java executable is generated,
>> and no other launcher, such as javac. This makes it impossible to run our
>> jtreg tests, which assume these are present.
>>
>> The solution is fortunately
On Thu, 11 Sep 2025 00:39:43 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> @AlanBateman @jianglizhou Now that Erik has approved the build
>> functionality, I'd appreciate if anyone of you could approve as well, then I
>> can finally integrate this.
>
>> @magicus I'll take a
On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 12:28:43 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Right now, the static-jdk image is a bit strange in that it's a modular
>> run-time image but with all native code compiled into bin/java. In time we
>> hope that jlink will be able to create a static image where everything is in
>
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:24:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> So while we continue to hammer out how to improve this, I think it is
> important to be able to test static builds in mainline, or they will break.
Agree with @magicus on the importance of being able to test static builds in
mainlin
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 14:09:58 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Right now, the static-jdk image is a bit strange in that it's a modular
> run-time image but with all native code compiled into bin/java. In time we
> hope that jlink will be able to create a static image where everything is in
> the singl
On Sun, Jun 8, 2025 at 8:19 PM David Holmes wrote:
> On 6/06/2025 1:23 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 1:33 AM David Holmes > <mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/06/2025 1:33 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >
On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 1:33 AM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 5/06/2025 1:33 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > Ok, still thanks for the thoughts, David.
> >
> > To summarize, here is what we can do for the current step:
> >
> > - Allow JNI_OnLoad_L and etc for JDK in
,
JNI_OnLoad_L can be called. That is an existing behavior since JDK 8.
Need to document (in spec or release notes?).
Best,
Jiangli
On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 9:31 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 4/06/2025 5:00 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 6:22 PM David Holmes wrote:
&g
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 6:22 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 3/06/2025 9:29 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 7:55 PM David Holmes wrote:
> >>
> >> On 31/05/2025 7:20 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >>> On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 11:54 PM David Ho
On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 7:55 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 31/05/2025 7:20 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 11:54 PM David Holmes
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 30/05/2025 9:26 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I just
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 11:54 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 30/05/2025 9:26 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 3:17 PM David Holmes
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 30/05/2025 2:57 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >>> On Wed, May
On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 3:17 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 30/05/2025 2:57 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 10:36 PM David Holmes
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jiangli,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 29/05/2025 3:27
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 10:36 PM David Holmes wrote:
>
> Hi Jiangli,
>
>
>
> On 29/05/2025 3:27 am, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >>> This is unfortunately quite complex, and I have started a discussion with
> >>> Alan if it is possible to update the JNI s
On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 6:01 PM Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>
> Magnus, thanks for the response. Please see comments inlined below.
>
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 4:52 AM Magnus Ihse Bursie
> wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-04-02 21:16, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> >
> > Hi Magnu
On Thu, 1 May 2025 22:46:00 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this PR that adds a `test-linux-x64-static` job, which runs
> tier1 tests on the static-jdk 'release' binary created from the
> `linux-x64-static` build job in GHA. Following are the details on the ch
On Thu, 22 May 2025 12:54:54 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou 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 cont
On Thu, 22 May 2025 12:54:54 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Taking a look at this today, sorry.
@shipilev I was going to integrate, then saw your above comment. I'll hold off
then. There are benefits for integrating and enabling testing on static-jdk in
GHA. If there is nothing major (or block
On Wed, 21 May 2025 22:09:15 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review this PR that adds a `test-linux-x64-static` job, which runs
>> tier1 tests on the static-jdk 'release' binary created from the
>> `linux-x64-static` build job in GHA. Following are th
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
On Fri, 16 May 2025 20:23:00 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I approved this but then I noticed that there were failures in the last GHA
> run for the new static run. You need to fix or problemlist them before
> integrating.
Right, I'll hold off integrating this PR, until the static testing g
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
On Thu, 15 May 2025 00:25:40 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Did you try this?
>
> I missed your above suggestion earlier. Experimenting with this. Thanks for
> the suggestion.
I went with using an explicit `extra-options` step to set up the extra
command-line options for `make te
On Wed, 14 May 2025 06:40:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> The code alternates between `if [[ '${{ inputs.static-suffix }}' != '' ]]`
> and `if: ${{ inputs.static-suffix == '-static' }}`. I don't really care about
> which you chose, but please pick one and stick to it.
Replaced `if [[ '${{
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
On Wed, 14 May 2025 06:37:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> I think you could add something like
>>
>> ${{ inputs.extra-test-options }}
>>
>> in the `make test-prebuilt` command line, and then set it up as arguments
>> when calling the test workflow.
>
> Did you try this?
I missed your ab
On Mon, 5 May 2025 20:59:08 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> .github/workflows/main.yml line 234:
>>
>>> 232: with:
>>> 233: platform: linux-x64
>>> 234: make-target: 'product-bundles test-bundles static-jdk-bundles'
>>
>&g
On Mon, 5 May 2025 14:55:54 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add $static_jdk_bundle_zip$static_jdk_bundle_tar_gz for bundle-found check.
>
> .
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
ts in the test
> matrix. The existing test jobs (on non-static JDK) set `debug-suffix` to
> `-debug` to test on `debug` binaries.
> - Add `static-suffix` parameter. Add `${{ inputs.static-suffix }}` to the
> test result artifact name.
> - Add `run-tests-static`.
> - Add step for n
On Mon, 5 May 2025 14:59:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Do we really need to duplicate all this code? From what I can see, this is
> just to be able to send in the JDK_FOR_COMPILE argument, right?
Yaml syntax is new to me. I went with that as it worked. :-) The static case
sets the `JDK_F
On Mon, 5 May 2025 14:57:08 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Please review this PR that adds a `test-linux-x64-static` job, which runs
>> tier1 tests on the static-jdk 'release' binary created from the
>> `linux-x64-static` build job in GHA. Following are the details on the
>> changes:
>>
>>
On Mon, 5 May 2025 14:52:38 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Please review this PR that adds a `test-linux-x64-static` job, which runs
>> tier1 tests on the static-jdk 'release' binary created from the
>> `linux-x64-static` build job in GHA. Following are the details on the
>> changes:
>>
>>
Please review this PR that adds a `test-linux-x64-static` job, which runs tier1
tests on the static-jdk 'release' binary created from the `linux-x64-static`
build job in GHA. Following are the details on the changes:
.github/actions/get-bundles/action.yml.
- Add `static-suffix` parameter. `stati
On Tue, 29 Apr 2025 06:43:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8355080' of ssh://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk into
>
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 18:22:13 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this PR that adds the static-jdk-bundles make target. The
> static-jdk-bundles is needed by JDK-8355452
> (https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8355452) for adding tier1 tests on
> linux-x64 static-jdk in GHA
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 19:24:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Please review this PR that adds the static-jdk-bundles make target. The
>> static-jdk-bundles is needed by JDK-8355452
>> (https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8355452) for adding tier1 tests on
>> linux-x64 static-jdk in GHA.
>
> M
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 13:04:57 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> > Having to upgrade to JNI is a bit sad -- although I get that it is required
> > as a workaround for now. For the longer term I'd prefer a better way to
> > integrate static lookups in the FFM API. For instance, all
> > `JNI::loadLibrary`
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 21:08:56 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this PR that changes to use `NativeLibraries.loadLibrary()` for
> loading the `libsyslookup` in `jdk.internal.foreign.SystemLookup` class.
>
> `NativeLibraries.loadLibrary()` handles both the shared library
On Mon, 28 Apr 2025 08:30:43 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8355080' of ssh://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk into
>
Please review this PR that adds the static-jdk-bundles make target. The
static-jdk-bundles is needed by JDK-8355452
(https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8355452) for adding tier1 tests on
linux-x64 static-jdk in GHA.
-
Commit messages:
- Add static-jdk-bundles make target.
Change
On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:31:50 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Hello Jiangli, if I understand this change correctly, then this is forcing a
> non-JNI library to be a JNI library for it to work on static JDK. Is that a
> requirement for static JDK builds? Or is it just a convenient way to use
> existi
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 15:14:27 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8355080' of ssh://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk into
>> JDK
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 21:32:48 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'JDK-8355080' of ssh://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk into
>> JDK
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:24:55 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
> Do we need this include? DEF_STATIC_JNI_OnLoad is defined by jni_util.h,
> which should include jni.h?
Removed, thanks!
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24801#discussion_r2055090726
gt; In addition to GHA testing, I tested the change on static-jdk with jdk tier1
> tests on linux-x64 locally. All java/foreign/* jdk tier1 tests pass with the
> change. Without the change, there are about 60 java/foreign/* jdk tier1 tests
> fail on static-jdk.
Jiangli Zhou has updat
gt; In addition to GHA testing, I tested the change on static-jdk with jdk tier1
> tests on linux-x64 locally. All java/foreign/* jdk tier1 tests pass with the
> change. Without the change, there are about 60 java/foreign/* jdk tier1 tests
> fail on static-jdk.
Jiangli Zhou has updat
On Tue, 22 Apr 2025 21:32:48 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> `sysLookup` does look much cleaner compared to `jdkLibraryPath`.
@liach Thanks for the quick review!
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24801#issuecomment-2822696068
Please review this PR that changes to use `NativeLibraries.loadLibrary()` for
loading the `libsyslookup` in `jdk.internal.foreign.SystemLookup` class.
`NativeLibraries.loadLibrary()` handles both the shared library and (static)
built-in library loading properly. On `static-jdk`, calling
`Native
> Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked
> with `static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 22:59:06 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked
> with `static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked
>> with `static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
>
> Wi
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked
>> with `static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
>
> Wi
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 18:39:46 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> > With that confirmation, I think we should go on with the `ONLY_EXPORTED`
> > solution instead.
>
> Done. I also reverted StaticLibs.gmk change.
>
> @caoman @tstuefe, please see if the updated change still lo
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> With that confirmation, I think we should go on with the `ONLY_EXPORTED`
> solution instead.
Done. I also reverted StaticLibs.gmk change.
@caoman @tstuefe, please see if the updated change still looks okay to you.
>
> If needed, w
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 09:22:44 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
>>> It seems we agree that we need, at some point, to have a high-level
>>> discussion on if libjsig should be supported on static builds, and if so,
>>> how it should be implemented. We also agree that having signal chaining
>>> enabled by de
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 17:36:00 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>> Please review the test fix that removes `libVThreadEventTest` explicit
>> dependency to `libjvm`, by removing the call to `JNI_GetCreatedJavaVMs` in
>> `Agent_OnAttach`. There is a `vm` argument passed via `Agent_OnAtt
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 09:44:38 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>>> I meant more like "not supported". You are correct that it is technically
>>> possible.
>>>
>>> How useful is signal chaining even these days?
>>>
>>> While we could do something like this, I see more trouble ahead. How should
>>> we d
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 07:41:42 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> > libjsig is provided by JDK.
>
> Yes for an application to chose to use so that its own signal usage can be
> better integrated with that of the JDK. Statically linking libjsig with a JDK
> makes no sense to me at all.
@dholmes-ora Pleas
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 18:57:48 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
> IIUC, signal chaining is a link time question for native executable using
> hotspot(launchers), the `java` launcher in regular JDK build is disabled by
> default unless user preload the libjsig.
>
> So, for the future jmod to support static l
On Wed, 5 Mar 2025 22:59:06 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked
> with `static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
I fi
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 20:20:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> It seems we agree that we need, at some point, to have a high-level
> discussion on if libjsig should be supported on static builds, and if so, how
> it should be implemented. We also agree that having signal chaining enabled
> by de
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 18:49:54 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I meant more like "not supported". You are correct that it is technically
> possible.
>
> How useful is signal chaining even these days?
>
> While we could do something like this, I see more trouble ahead. How should
> we do when we
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 12:37:52 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I am a bit confused here. libjsig is an application/end-user library.
libjsig is provided by JDK.
> It sounds like something is statically linking libjsig and causing signal
> chaining to break. ???
AFAICT, signal chaining works when lib
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 16:01:16 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is not the correct way to solve this. You should flag libjsig as
> `ONLY_EXPORTED` instead, which means that the library will not be included in
> a static build.
I think we do want to include `libjsig.a` as part of the JDK stat
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 18:15:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> But if we do not link it with the launcher, it will not get tested. I don't
> think it is a good idea to provide a binary that have not even had a shred of
> testing. I'm rather leaning towards saying that signal chaining is not
> po
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 05:55:48 GMT, Man Cao wrote:
> libjsig is not supposed to be enabled by default. Per [Java 23
> doc](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/23/troubleshoot/handle-signals-and-exceptions.html#GUID-CB49A2A7-2A9F-4C18-948F-6D4A96FF688D),
> it is user's choice whether to use libj
Please review this PR that excludes `libjsig` from being statically linked with
`static-jdk` `java` launcher by default. Please see details in
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8351309 description and comments. Thanks
-
Commit messages:
- Filter out libjsig by default for static
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 01:40:34 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review the test fix that removes `libVThreadEventTest` explicit
> dependency to `libjvm`, by removing the call to `JNI_GetCreatedJavaVMs` in
> `Agent_OnAttach`. There is a `vm` argument passed via `Agent_OnAttach`. Wi
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 01:40:34 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review the test fix that removes `libVThreadEventTest` explicit
> dependency to `libjvm`, by removing the call to `JNI_GetCreatedJavaVMs` in
> `Agent_OnAttach`. There is a `vm` argument passed via `Agent_OnAttach`. Wi
Please review the test fix that removes `libVThreadEventTest` explicit
dependency to `libjvm`, by removing the call to `JNI_GetCreatedJavaVMs` in
`Agent_OnAttach`. There is a `vm` argument passed via `Agent_OnAttach`. With
the change, `libVThreadEventTest` no longer needs to be linked with `libj
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 19:41:51 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this change that adds a `linux-x86-static` job in GHA. The job
> builds the `static-jdk-image` release binary on linux-x64. Please see
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2025-February/048830.html fo
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 15:02:08 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Please review this change that adds a `linux-x86-static` job in GHA. The job
>> builds the `static-jdk-image` release binary on linux-x64. Please see
>> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2025-February/048830.html for
>> s
g/browse/JDK-8349399?focusedId=14749789&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14749789.
>
>
> GHA: https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13163673020
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
comm
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 19:44:50 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Ah, one more trouble: this job produces bundles. But that bundle name is just
> `linux-x64`, which overrides the standard bundle. See how
> `build-linux-x64-static-libs` overrides `bundle-suffix:`, do the same here.
> E.g. `bundle-suf
g/browse/JDK-8349399?focusedId=14749789&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14749789.
>
>
> GHA: https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13163673020
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
comm
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 14:59:11 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Yes, we should distinguish between `static-libs` and `static` JDK.
>> Currently, we refer `static` JDK as a 'fully' statically linked `java`
>> launcher, plus `lib/modules` and other JDK resource files needed for
>> runtime.
>>
>>
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 17:59:46 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> .github/workflows/main.yml line 171:
>>
>>> 169: if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64 == 'true'
>>> 170:
>>> 171: build-linux-x64-static-jdk:
>>
>> Move this closer to `build-linux-x64-static-libs`? These are somewhat
>> relate
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 17:59:46 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> .github/workflows/main.yml line 171:
>>
>>> 169: if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64 == 'true'
>>> 170:
>>> 171: build-linux-x64-static-jdk:
>>
>> Move this closer to `build-linux-x64-static-libs`? These are somewhat
>> relate
g/browse/JDK-8349399?focusedId=14749789&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14749789.
>
>
> GHA: https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13163673020
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
o
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 18:31:52 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review the fix to make
> `java/lang/String/nativeEncoding/StringPlatformChars.java` jtreg test:
>
> - Lookup `JNU_GetStringPlatformChars`, `JNU_ClassString` and
> `JNU_NewStringPlatform` dynamically
>
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 14:24:22 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> Noticed this when reviewing
>> [JDK-8349399](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8349399), which had to
>> kludgy workaround the hunk introduced by `static-libs-bundles` addition
>> ([JDK-8337265](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 06:57:05 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > Updated to skipping
> > `java/lang/String/nativeEncoding/StringPlatformChars.java` on static JDK.
>
> Thanks. If you can bump the copyright header date then I think we are done
> with this one.
Done, thanks!
-
PR Comment:
ibstringPlatformChars.so`
> with `libjava.so`
> - Link with `-ldl` explicitly
>
> The test passed on Linux, macos and Windows in GHA testing,
> https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13320840902/job/37206171224
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request incrementally wit
ibstringPlatformChars.so`
> with `libjava.so`
> - Link with `-ldl` explicitly
>
> The test passed on Linux, macos and Windows in GHA testing,
> https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13320840902/job/37206171224
Jiangli Zhou has updated the pull request with a new target b
On Fri, 14 Feb 2025 18:31:52 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review the fix to make
> `java/lang/String/nativeEncoding/StringPlatformChars.java` jtreg test:
>
> - Lookup `JNU_GetStringPlatformChars`, `JNU_ClassString` and
> `JNU_NewStringPlatform` dynamically
>
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:58:03 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> > @shipilev Can you help review/approve the change, if no other questions?
>
> Sorry for not looking at this sooner.
>
> It looks to me that you are trying to work-around a little mess introduced by
> `static-libs-bundles` addition
>
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 19:41:51 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review this change that adds a `linux-x86-static` job in GHA. The job
> builds the `static-jdk-image` release binary on linux-x64. Please see
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2025-February/048830.html fo
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 17:05:06 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I don't object to changing this test but it might be simpler to just skip
> this test, once we can use `@requires !jdk.static`.
Thanks, @AlanBateman. I think skipping this test for static JDK sounds
reasonable to me, since this test seems
Please review the fix to make
`java/lang/String/nativeEncoding/StringPlatformChars.java` jtreg test:
- Lookup `JNU_GetStringPlatformChars`, `JNU_ClassString` and
`JNU_NewStringPlatform` dynamically
- Remove `#include "jni_util.h"` and don't link `libstringPlatformChars.so`
with `libjava.so`
-
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 23:37:44 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>>> @bplb You may have to double check that this works for us.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> @bplb, please let me know your internal testing result. If there's no
>> additional internal test source changes in those native libraries, I think
>> t
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 03:00:13 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please review the fix that removes libjava shared library dependency from
> jtreg test libNewDirectByteBuffer, libDirectIO and libInheritedChannel. Thanks
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 2eac490b
Author:J
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 20:19:08 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Please help review this change. The current version calls `FT_Property_Set`
> using the function address returned from `dlsym` for the static case as well.
> This is to avoid build issue on build system using older `libfreet
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 21:57:13 GMT, Phil Race wrote:
> The build tasks all succeeded (well, there's a not-relevant windows installer
> one still in progress, so never mind about that).
Thanks again, @prrace! I'll integrate tomorrow early morning.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.or
1 - 100 of 310 matches
Mail list logo
