On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 10:02:05 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
> in TreeTest.test5.
> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
> lead to double pids in the child list; at least
We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX in
TreeTest.test5.
test TreeTest.test5(): failure
java.lang.AssertionError: expected direct children expected [2] but found [3]
at org.testng.Assert.fail(Assert.java:99)
at
at org.testng.SuiteRunner.privateRun(SuiteRunner.java:337)
> at org.testng.SuiteRunner.run(SuiteRunner.java:286)
> at org.testng.SuiteRunnerWorker.runSuite(SuiteRunnerWorker.java:53)
> at org.testng.SuiteRunnerWorker.run(SuiteRunnerWorker.java:96)
> at org.testng.TestNG.runSu
tead I was able to eliminate those double pids (and increase
> the performance by a factor of 4). Otherwise we would have to add an
> algorithm to filter out the doubles after creating the raw list.
Joachim Kern has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the las
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 09:30:09 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 06:30:33 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Joachim Kern has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> cosmetic changes 2
>
> src/java.base/aix/native/libjava/ProcessHandleImpl_aix.c lin
:1140)
> at org.testng.TestNG.runSuites(TestNG.java:1069)
> at org.testng.TestNG.run(TestNG.java:1037)
> at
> com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.TestNGRunner.main(TestNGRunner.java:102)
> at
> com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.TestNGRunner.main(TestNGRunner.java:58)
> at
> java.base/jd
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:00:18 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>>
>> test TreeTest.test5(): failure
>> java.lang.AssertionError: expected direct chil
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 09:36:47 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in
tead I was able to eliminate those double pids (and increase
> the performance by a factor of 4). Otherwise we would have to add an
> algorithm to filter out the doubles after creating the raw list.
Joachim Kern has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit si
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:52:54 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Probably keep the function without split into 2 functions, but just adjust
>> the comment a bit as Thomas suggested ?
>
> The callers in ProcessHandlerImpl depend on knowing the parent pid for each
> process.
> They are used to find the
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:22:21 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Joachim Kern has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> cosmetic changes 2
>
> src/java.base/aix/native/libjava/ProcessHandleImpl_aix
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 07:44:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 09:03:10 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Once more, remove AIX dirent64 et al defines
>
> And also `#define statv
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 12:07:45 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> Current commit compiles nicely on AIX. One issue we might still have
> statvfs/statvfs64 is not mentioned here in the table of functions/structs
> redefined on AIX
>
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 08:18:14 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 14:47:26 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> And also `#define statvfs statvfs64` is not necessary with the same
>> explanation as for the `opendir` defines above -- sorry again.
>> The very only difference between statvfs and statvfs64 is that the
>> filesy
On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 15:57:02 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> This looks like it's adding code to search LD_LIBRARY_PATH on Linux/macOS
> too, did you mean to do that?
Hi Alan, this first commit of the PR is just a question if Linux/macOS want to
participate in this 3rd method. For them it's just a
Since ~ end of March, after
[JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131),
tools/launcher/JliLaunchTest.java fails on AIX. Failure is :
stdout: [];
stderr: [Error: could not find libjava.so
Error: Could not find Java SE Runtime Environment.
]
exitValue = 2
) ? The libjli.so is gone on AIX after
> [JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131), and with this
> also the image discovery based on GetApplicationHomeFromDll which uses
> libjli.so .
>
> Without libjli.so we have to analyze the LD-LIBRARY_PATH / LIBPATH envvar.
&
) ? The libjli.so is gone on AIX after
> [JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131), and with this
> also the image discovery based on GetApplicationHomeFromDll which uses
> libjli.so .
>
> Without libjli.so we have to analyze the LD-LIBRARY_PATH / LIBPATH envvar.
&
) ? The libjli.so is gone on AIX after
> [JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131), and with this
> also the image discovery based on GetApplicationHomeFromDll which uses
> libjli.so .
>
> Without libjli.so we have to analyze the LD-LIBRARY_PATH / LIBPATH envvar.
&
) ? The libjli.so is gone on AIX after
> [JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131), and with this
> also the image discovery based on GetApplicationHomeFromDll which uses
> libjli.so .
>
> Without libjli.so we have to analyze the LD-LIBRARY_PATH / LIBPATH envvar.
&
On Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:27:29 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> As of [JDK-8325880](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325880), building
>> the JDK requires version 17 of IBM Open XL C/C++ (xlc). This is in effect
>> clang by another name, and it uses the clang toolchain in the JDK build.
>>
On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:48:08 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> As of [JDK-8325880](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325880), building
>> the JDK requires version 17 of IBM Open XL C/C++ (xlc). This is in effect
>> clang by another name, and it uses the clang toolchain in the JDK build.
>>
On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:31:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Revert SEARCH_PATH changes
>
> make/autoconf/flags-cflags.m4 line 687:
>
>> 685: PICFLAG="-fPIC"
>>
On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:48:08 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> As of [JDK-8325880](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325880), building
>> the JDK requires version 17 of IBM Open XL C/C++ (xlc). This is in effect
>> clang by another name, and it uses the clang toolchain in the JDK build.
>>
On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:48:08 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> As of [JDK-8325880](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325880), building
>> the JDK requires version 17 of IBM Open XL C/C++ (xlc). This is in effect
>> clang by another name, and it uses the clang toolchain in the JDK build.
>>
On Mon, 11 Mar 2024 08:59:03 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> make/autoconf/flags-cflags.m4 line 687:
>>
>>> 685: PICFLAG="-fPIC"
>>> 686: PIEFLAG="-fPIE"
>>> 687: elif test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xclang && tes
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 18:14:36 GMT, Suchismith Roy wrote:
>> Allow support for both .a and .so files in AIX.
>> If .so file is not found, allow fallback to .a extension.
>> JBS Issue: [JDK-8319516](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319516)
>
> Suchismith Roy has updated the pull request
On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 14:45:07 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
> Since ~ end of March, after
> [JDK-8329131](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329131),
> tools/launcher/JliLaunchTest.java fails on AIX. Failure is :
>
> stdout: [];
> stderr: [Error: could not find libjava
31 matches
Mail list logo
