On 2018-11-27 13:26, Ichiroh Takiguchi wrote:
Hello Volker.
Sorry for your confusion.
I want to keep visibility feature on AIX platform for future OpenJDK.
If I can apply workaround for AIX platform...
XLC++ 13.1 is confused destructor order for ~SimpleCriticalSectionLock()
on
Hello Volker.
OK, I follow your decision.
Anyway, I'd like to show you one more workaround.
$ hg di src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp
src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.cpp
$ sh NativeImageBuffer.o.cmdline
Hi Adam, Ichiroh,
this is actually exactly what I wanted to propose in the mail I was
just writing :)
You may have noticed that I've renamed the bug to "8214063: [AIX]
Disable symbol visibility flags". For the next step which will enable
symbol visibility on AIX we already have the following
Hi Ichiroh and Volker.
Short version:
I propose we exclude the -qvisibility option to conclude this bug, and
raise a new bug to cover adding -qvisibility into the build, complete with
the attendant supporting changes.
Long Version:
Based on this bug, I feel confident saying that anyone
Hello Volker.
Sorry for your confusion.
I want to keep visibility feature on AIX platform for future OpenJDK.
If I can apply workaround for AIX platform...
XLC++ 13.1 is confused destructor order for ~SimpleCriticalSectionLock()
on src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp, if
Hello Volker.
Sorry for your confusion.
I want to keep visibility feature on AIX platform for future OpenJDK.
If I can apply workaround for AIX platform...
XLC++ 13.1 is confused destructor order for ~SimpleCriticalSectionLock()
on src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp, if
hing I don't understand about your patch (the
changes in
> > >> > > > > > "jni_md.h" look good although I haven't tested them)
> is why you need
> > >> > > > > > the extra changes in NativeImageBuffer.cpp?
> > >> > > > > > &
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 6:52 PM Ichiroh Takiguchi
wrote:
>
> Hello Volker.
>
> I posted same kind of fix before:
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/ppc-aix-port-dev/2018-June/003551.html
>
> I could not find out brace handling issue on XLC++ 13.1.
>
> For workaround,
> ==
> ---
>
Hello Volker.
I posted same kind of fix before:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/ppc-aix-port-dev/2018-June/003551.html
I could not find out brace handling issue on XLC++ 13.1.
For workaround,
==
---
old/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.cpp 2018-06-07
21:06:09
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 2:16 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
> Apologies for the delay.
>
> I ran the contents of the file as requested (neat tip, thanks!) and I
> discovered something:
>
> If jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h contains this:
>
> -
> extern "C" {
>
...Or we could simply remove the -qvisibility bit from the .mk file,
as Marcus mentioned.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214063
Might be less technically correct, but it wouldn't make OpenJDK on
AIX more technically incorrect than it already is, with the added
bonus that it allows
Hi Volker,
Apologies for the delay.
I ran the contents of the file as requested (neat tip, thanks!) and I
discovered something:
If jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h contains this:
-
extern "C" {
__attribute__((visibility("default"))) jobject JNICALL
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 3:00 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
> 1) Here is the "reasonable" code in the generated
> jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h
>
> --
> /* DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE - it is machine generated */
> #include
> /*
Hi Volker,
1) Here is the "reasonable" code in the generated
jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h
--
/* DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE - it is machine generated */
#include
/* Header for class jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer */
#ifndef
Hi Volker,
Will do some digging and see if I can figure out the cause of the
compilation problem.
Also, I don't have a record of the original error after we added the
JNIEXPORT/JNIIMPORT fix in, so I've got a build running now to reproduce
it.
Best Regards
Adam Farley
IBM Runtimes
Volker
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 12:44 PM Magnus Ihse Bursie
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2018-11-20 18:50, Volker Simonis wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:15 PM Thomas Stüfe
> > wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:12 PM Adam Farley8
> >> wrote:
> >>> Heya Tom,
> >>>
> >>> "In JDK11 and JDK12, source files
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 1:46 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
>
> Hi Volker,
>
> The NativeImageBuffer.cpp changes are best explained by the full text of
> the referenced GitHub Pull Request, copied here for simplicity:
>
> -
> Define JNIEXPORT and JNIIMPORT for xlc
Hi Volker,
The NativeImageBuffer.cpp changes are best explained by the full text of
the referenced GitHub Pull Request, copied here for simplicity:
-
Define JNIEXPORT and JNIIMPORT for xlc version 13.1 or newer. Without
this,
almost no symbols are
On 2018-11-20 18:50, Volker Simonis wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:15 PM Thomas Stüfe wrote:
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:12 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
Heya Tom,
"In JDK11 and JDK12, source files are compiled with -qvisibility=hidden
when using xlc version other than 12.1. That doesn't seem
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:15 PM Thomas Stüfe wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:12 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
> >
> > Heya Tom,
> >
> > "In JDK11 and JDK12, source files are compiled with -qvisibility=hidden
> > when using xlc version other than 12.1. That doesn't seem to play well
> > with link
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:12 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
>
> Heya Tom,
>
> "In JDK11 and JDK12, source files are compiled with -qvisibility=hidden
> when using xlc version other than 12.1. That doesn't seem to play well
> with link option -bexpall. "
>
> Found that buried in one of the associated Git
Heya Tom,
"In JDK11 and JDK12, source files are compiled with -qvisibility=hidden
when using xlc version other than 12.1. That doesn't seem to play well
with link option -bexpall. "
Found that buried in one of the associated Git issues. It appears that
it's OpenJDK's use of that option that's
Hi Adam , the webrev looks OK to me (not a Reviewer however). I think it
will not break anything on lower xlc versions (like xlc 12.1 that we are
using).
Are you able to do a full successful build with this change (when using xlc
13.1) ?
Do you have a chance to test with the
Hi Adam,
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 5:12 PM Adam Farley8 wrote:
>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Sounds reasonable. I've added a webex to the bug, and here's a link to the
> bug.
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214063
>
> This patch is required because otherwise, when building on AIX using xlc 3.1,
>
Hi Tom,
Sounds reasonable. I've added a webex to the bug, and here's a link to the
bug.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8214063
This patch is required because otherwise, when building on AIX using xlc
3.1,
the build fails with this error:
"Visibility is not allowed on a reference
Hi Adam,
could you please include link to the JBS issue and either link to the
patch/webrev or link to the webrev, or at the very least the patch
verbatim?
As for the issue itself: could you please elaborate why this fails with xlc13?
Also, a real patch would be helpful instead here of yet
Hi Adam,
As a convenience to the numerous developers in OpenJDK please include
a link to the issue and the changes when sending a request for review.
It makes things go much smoother. An in-line patch may be more
convenient in this case.
Also note that *only* changes using the OpenJDK aliases
Hi All
Both the problem and the solution appear straight-forward enough.
Details included in the bug description.
Thoughts and opinions welcome.
Best Regards
Adam Farley
IBM Runtimes
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
28 matches
Mail list logo
