Hi Matthias,

Backport looks good to me, too. But please move the new section before 
TOOLCHAIN_CFLAGS_JDK_CONLY in make/autoconf/flags-cflags.m4, as suggested by 
Andrew. No need for new webrev.

Cheers
Christoph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: build-dev <build-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of
> Andrew John Hughes
> Sent: Donnerstag, 13. Februar 2020 23:18
> To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baes...@sap.com>; jdk-updates-
> d...@openjdk.java.net; 'build-dev@openjdk.java.net' <build-
> d...@openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: Re: RFR [jdk11]: 8234525: enable link-time section-gc for linux s390x
> to remove unused code
> 
> 
> 
> On 13/02/2020 11:48, Baesken, Matthias wrote:
> > Ping - any reviews ?
> >
> > Thanks, Matthias
> >
> > From: Baesken, Matthias
> > Sent: Dienstag, 11. Februar 2020 10:24
> > To: jdk-updates-...@openjdk.java.net; 'build-dev@openjdk.java.net'
> <build-dev@openjdk.java.net>
> > Subject: RFR [jdk11]: 8234525: enable link-time section-gc for linux s390x 
> > to
> remove unused code
> >
> > Hello , please review  the downport of   "8234525: enable link-time section-
> gc for linux s390x to remove unused code"   to jdk11 .
> >
> > My change from jdk/jdk  did not apply directly and I had to adjust it 
> > slightly .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Bug  and  jdk/jdk change :
> >
> > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8234525
> > https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/c04fa10636fd
> >
> >
> > Adjusted change for jdk11u-dev :
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbaesken/webrevs/8234525.0_jdk11/
> >
> >
> > Original review thread :
> >
> > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2019-
> November/026326.html
> >
> >
> > Thanks, Matthias
> >
> 
> In the original patch, the lines are added after
> TOOLCHAIN_CFLAGS_JDK_CONLY. In the 11u version, they seem to have
> needlessly moved above it.
> 
> Otherwise, looks good.
> 
> Regarding the patch itself, are these flags only useful when the s390x
> port is present or would they be advantageous on older versions where
> s390x is still using the Zero assembler port?
> 
> Thanks,
> --
> Andrew :)
> 
> Senior Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
> 
> PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
> Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04  C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
> https://keybase.io/gnu_andrew

Reply via email to