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 issue "8204541: Correctly support AIX xlC 13.1 symbol visibility flags" [1]. Please assign yourself and use it once the issues are resolved. In the meantime I've tested your change and it works fine with xlC 12. I've only added a reference to the JBS id in the comments. Please find a webrev of the new version here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2018/8214063/ I can sponsor that change once you and Ichiroh confirm that it also works for you with xlC 13 and I get one more review. I've opened a new thread for this on build-dev because the fix has now degenerated into a pure build change: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2018-November/024096.html Please answer on that new thread. Regards, Volker PS: I don't think it makes too much sense investing into xlC 13. You're probably aware of "JEP 347: Adopt C++14 Language Features in HotSpot" [2] which will start introducing C++14 language features soon. So it may be wiser to test right with the new beta of xlC 16 because, as far as I know, there's no chance to get C++124 support into xlC 13 anyway. [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8204541 [2] http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/347 On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 3:51 PM Adam Farley8 <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > 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 building on AIX is > using xlC 12.1 without the -qvisibility option. > > I'm confident because, as discussed, the build doesn't complete on non-12.1 > with source as it is now. > > After deliberation, it seems the right way to resolve this is to first > resolve the issue breaking the build, and *then* including a set of changes > required to enable OpenJDK to build successfully on AIX whiule using a new > compile option across the board (including on 12.1) > > This is because the latter change, enabling us to build with -qvisibility, > will (as magnus notes) potentially cause problems elsewhere, and may require > a lot of testing. > > Testing which may not be needed on 13.1, as we're updating the compiler > version (which *might* change stuff) as opposed to adding a new command-line > option (which *will* change stuff). > > Also, I believe the .cpp change is preferable to the .hpp change because it's > easier to link the change to the error. Also, it's shorter. > > My 2 cents. Volker, Ichiroh? > > Best Regards > > Adam Farley > IBM Runtimes > > > "Ichiroh Takiguchi" <taki...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on 27/11/2018 12:36:41: > > > From: "Ichiroh Takiguchi" <taki...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > To: "Volker Simonis" <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > > Cc: Adam Farley8/UK/IBM@IBMGB, "Java Core Libs" <core-libs- > > d...@openjdk.java.net> > > Date: 27/11/2018 12:33 > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK will not build on AIX while > > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > > > 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 visibility > > feature is specified. > > > > Please see following testing. > > (I already applied a fix against > > src/java.base/unix/native/include/jni_md.h) > > > > $ sh NativeImageBuffer.o.cmdline > > "/home/jdktest/sandbox/jdk/build/aix-ppc64-server-release/support/ > > headers/java.base/jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h", > > line 15.27: 1540-0040 (S) The text > > "Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap" is unexpected. > > "visibility" may be undeclared or ambiguous. > > > > If I applied following change > > ====== > > $ hg di src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp > > diff -r 6cf555c2e9ff src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp > > --- a/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp Sun Nov > > 25 21:41:12 2018 +0900 > > +++ b/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/osSupport.hpp Tue Nov > > 27 21:04:41 2018 +0900 > > @@ -103,6 +103,7 @@ > > SimpleCriticalSection *lock; > > public: > > > > +#ifndef _AIX > > SimpleCriticalSectionLock(SimpleCriticalSection *cslock) { > > this->lock = cslock; > > lock->enter(); > > @@ -111,6 +112,16 @@ > > ~SimpleCriticalSectionLock() { > > lock->exit(); > > } > > +#else > > + ~SimpleCriticalSectionLock() { > > + lock->exit(); > > + } > > + > > + SimpleCriticalSectionLock(SimpleCriticalSection *cslock) { > > + this->lock = cslock; > > + lock->enter(); > > + } > > +#endif > > }; > > > > #endif // LIBJIMAGE_OSSUPPORT_HPP > > ====== > > > > No output was displayed by NativeImageBuffer.o.cmdline > > $ sh NativeImageBuffer.o.cmdline > > $ > > > > Adam, if possible, could you double check my code ? > > > > Volker, I appreciate if you reconsider about this issue. > > > > Thanks, > > Ichiroh Takiguchi > > > > > > On 2018-11-27 03:26, Volker Simonis wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 6:52 PM Ichiroh Takiguchi > > > <taki...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> 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, > > >> ====== > > >> --- > > >> old/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.cpp > > >> 2018-06-07 > > >> 21:06:09 +0000 > > >> +++ > > >> new/src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.cpp > > >> 2018-06-07 > > >> 21:06:09 +0000 > > >> @@ -39,7 +39,9 @@ > > >> #include "imageFile.hpp" > > >> #include "inttypes.hpp" > > >> #include "jimage.hpp" > > >> +#if !defined(_AIX) > > >> #include "osSupport.hpp" > > >> +#endif > > >> > > >> #include "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h" > > >> ====== > > >> > > >> I think osSupport.hpp is no need for all platform. > > >> (I tested it on Linux and AIX build) > > >> > > >> What do you think ? > > >> > > > > > > Sorry, but I don't understand your mail. Did you saw the same problems > > > like Adam when compiling "NativeImageBuffer.cpp"? > > > > > > - If yes, did you fix them by excluding the inclusion of > > > "osSupport.hpp" ? That would be strange, because it doesn't seem to > > > related to the problems reported until now at all. > > > > > > - If no, I'm totally confused... > > > > > >> Thanks, > > >> Ichiroh Takiguchi > > >> IBM Japan, Ltd. > > >> > > >> On 2018-11-27 02:06, Volker Simonis wrote: > > >> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 2:16 PM Adam Farley8 <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> > > >> > 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" { > > >> >> __attribute__((visibility("default"))) jobject JNICALL > > >> >> Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap > > >> >> (JNIEnv *, jclass, jstring); > > >> >> } > > >> >> ----- > > >> >> > > >> >> It results in this error: > > >> >> > > >> >> ----- > > >> >> blah blah "visibility" may be undeclared or ambiguous. > > >> >> ----- > > >> >> > > >> >> But replacing that bit with this code: > > >> >> > > >> >> ----- > > >> >> extern "C" __attribute__((visibility("default"))) jobject JNICALL > > >> >> Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap > > >> >> (JNIEnv *, jclass, jstring); > > >> >> ----- > > >> >> > > >> >> Results in no error. > > >> >> > > >> >> So it seems the difference between an "extern "C"" block and an inline > > >> >> "extern"C"" is what's causing the issue. > > >> >> > > >> > > > >> > Thanks for finding this out. Now at least we know the root cause of the > > >> > problem. > > >> > > > >> > Without having read through the C++ specification, I'd assume this is > > >> > a problem of XLC 13. > > >> > > > >> > As long as XLC has problems to parse such kinds of constructs, I thing > > >> > we should just remove "-qvisibility" from the AIX build as proposed by > > >> > Magnus (and called "plan B" in you other mail) because changing the > > >> > javah generator for AIX would be a much larger task. > > >> > > > >> > Thank you and best regards, > > >> > Volker > > >> > > > >> >> I don't understand why, but there we have it. > > >> >> > > >> >> A shame the header file is generated. An ideal fix would either be to: > > >> >> > > >> >> 1) Change xlC to make this work inside an extern "C" block. > > >> >> or > > >> >> 2) Change the way the header file is generated to add that extern "C" > > >> >> bit onto the line itself. > > >> >> > > >> >> However both of those have the potential to break other stuff. > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm reaching out to the xlC developers now to figure out what's going > > >> >> on, but in the > > >> >> meantime it seems to me like the proposed fix is still the right way > > >> >> to go for a short-term > > >> >> resolution. > > >> >> > > >> >> What are your thoughts? > > >> >> > > >> >> Best Regards > > >> >> > > >> >> Adam Farley > > >> >> IBM Runtimes > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote on 22/11/2018 > > >> >> 14:25:04: > > >> >> > > >> >> > From: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > To: adam.far...@uk.ibm.com > > >> >> > Cc: Java Core Libs <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>, "Stuefe, > > >> >> > Thomas" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > Date: 22/11/2018 14:25 > > >> >> > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK will not build on AIX while > > >> >> > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > >> >> > > > >> >> > On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 3:00 PM Adam Farley8 > > <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> 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 <jni.h> > > >> >> > > /* Header for class jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer */ > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > #ifndef _Included_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer > > >> >> > > #define _Included_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer > > >> >> > > #ifdef __cplusplus > > >> >> > > extern "C" { > > >> >> > > #endif > > >> >> > > /* > > >> >> > > * Class: jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer > > >> >> > > * Method: getNativeMap > > >> >> > > * Signature: (Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/nio/ByteBuffer; > > >> >> > > */ > > >> >> > > JNIEXPORT jobject JNICALL > > >> >> > Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap > > >> >> > > (JNIEnv *, jclass, jstring); > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > #ifdef __cplusplus > > >> >> > > } > > >> >> > > #endif > > >> >> > > #endif > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > 2) I have not yet reported this as a bug to the xlc developers. I > > >> >> > will contact > > >> >> > > them now. > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > 3) I did some experimenting, and it seems that the > > >> >> > NativeImageBuffer.cpp change > > >> >> > > is the only thing standing between us and a successful compilation > > >> >> > on aix using > > >> >> > > xlc 13.1 (assuming you're using source that compiles on > > aix with xlc 12.1). > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > With that change (plus the jni_md change), the > > >> >> > > compilationcompletes. > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > Without that change (after you've added the jni_md change > > though),the build > > >> >> > > will fail with this error message: > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > >> >> > > 12:19:58 "/workspace/build/aix-ppc64-normal-server-release/ > > >> >> > support/headers/java.base/jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h", > > >> >> > line 15.27: 1540-0040 (S) The text > > >> >> > "Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap" is > > >> >> > unexpected. "visibility" may be undeclared or ambiguous. > > >> >> > > 12:19:59 CoreLibraries.gmk:192: recipe for target '/workspace/ > > >> >> > build/aix-ppc64-normal-server-release/support/native/java.base/ > > >> >> > libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.o' failed > > >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Can you please do the following: > > >> >> > - take the command line from > > >> >> > /workspace/build/aix-ppc64-normal-server-release/support/native/ > > >> >> > java.base/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.o.cmdline > > >> >> > - replace '-c' with '-E' to get the preprocessor output > > >> >> > - have a look at the offending line (e.g. have JNIEXPORT / JNICALL > > >> >> > been correctly expanded ?) > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Unfortunately I don't have a version of XLC 13 to test this. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Best Regards > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > Adam Farley > > >> >> > > IBM Runtimes > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > P.S. Tried making a small, stand-alone example and it failed to > > >> >> > reproduce the problem. > > >> >> > > Will keep trying, and I'll supply a further update in the event of > > >> >> > a) results, > > >> >> > > or b) a response from the xlc guys. > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote on 21/11/ > > 2018 14:07:07: > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > From: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > To: adam.far...@uk.ibm.com > > >> >> > > > Cc: Java Core Libs <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net>, "Stuefe, > > >> >> > > > Thomas" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > Date: 21/11/2018 14:07 > > >> >> > > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK will not build onAIX > > >> >> > > > while > > >> >> > > > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 1:46 PM Adam Farley8 > > >> >> > <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> 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 version 13.1 or newer. > > >> >> > Without this, > > >> >> > > > > almost no symbols are exported from shared libraries > > due to use of > > >> >> > > > > -qvisibility=hidden as specified in make/lib/ > > LibCommon.gmk. The symptoms > > >> >> > > > > are reported in eclipse/openj9#2468. > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > Unfortunately, this encounters a bug in xlc: it fails > > to parsewhat seems > > >> >> > > > > to be reasonable code. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > Sorry, but I don't see how this answers my question. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > 1. Which "reasonable code" does xlc fails to parse. A > > >> >> > > > stand-alone > > >> >> > > > example would be nice. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > 2. Have you reported this as bug to the xlc developers? > > What didthey say? > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > 3. "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h" doesn't seem to be > > >> >> > > > special. It's a plain, generated JNI header file as generated by > > >> >> > > > 'javah' or 'javac -h'. If XLC 13 has problems parsing > > it, there should > > >> >> > > > be much more places which need fixing. So what's special about > > >> >> > > > "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h". > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > In the referenced pull request > > >> >> > > > (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > u=https-3A__github.com_eclipse_openj9_issues_2468&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- > > >> >> > > > siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf- > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=sgfFd6mB1EYM4nOM89rgFFzUyX7B21XbckIY7L0kUNU&s=TJ-4nr8ikZKImwDygirRTxLybsnQWBN71nEZCwZ59NQ&e= > > >> >> > > > ) I can only see linker > > >> >> > > > errors (and no compiler errors). The linker errors are for both > > >> >> > > > libjsig and libjava. They are related to the symbol > > ".sigaction" in > > >> >> > > > jsig.o and I don't see how this should be related to > > >> >> > > > NativeImageBuffer.cpp or > > "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h". > > >> >> > > > NativeImageBuffer.cpp is only used to create libjimage > > and not related > > >> >> > > > in any way to libjsig or libjava. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > It seems wired to do the change to NativeImageBuffer.cpp > > which you've > > >> >> > > > proposed without understanding the real cause of the problem. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > Regards, > > >> >> > > > Volker > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > A workaround is required in just one place: > > >> >> > > > > src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/NativeImageBuffer.cpp. > > >> >> > > > > ----------------------------------------- > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > Best Regards > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > Adam Farley > > >> >> > > > > IBM Runtimes > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> wrote on 20/ > > 11/2018 17:50:41: > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > From: Volker Simonis <volker.simo...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > > > To: "Stuefe, Thomas" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > > > Cc: adam.far...@uk.ibm.com, Java Core Libs <core-libs- > > >> >> > > > d...@openjdk.java.net> > > >> >> > > > > > Date: 20/11/2018 17:59 > > >> >> > > > > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK will not > > build on AIX while > > >> >> > > > > > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:15 PM Thomas Stüfe > > >> >> > > > <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 6:12 PM Adam Farley8 > > >> >> > > > <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> 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 toplay 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 causing the > > >> >> > problem, though > > >> >> > > > > > > > I couldn't speculate as to why it was added in > > the first place. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > I see this has also been noted in https:// > > >> >> > > > > > urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8204541&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- > > >> >> > > > > > siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf- > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=SD6UdjysISJRBlWUm8pEzF5lRZ5opfbrKzEh_jrOras&s=5qDEdIfg8qZ- > > >> >> > > > > > vCglsZ9qNDTEPMnCkj-mVPVah6eEDLE&e= > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Does that answer your question? > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > Yes, Thank you. Odd. Will have to do archeology onthat > > >> >> > > > > > > one. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > No I begin to understand the problem as well :) > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > It was actually change "8202322: AIX: symbol > > visibility flags not > > >> >> > > > > > support on xlc 12.1" [1] which introduced "- > > qvisibility=hidden" for > > >> >> > > > > > XLC version not equal to 12.1. That's kind of a weak > > check and I > > >> >> > > > > > suppose nobody has ever tested this change with an > > XLC version other > > >> >> > > > > > than 12.1 (until you came along :). Maybe that check > > should be a more > > >> >> > > > > > precisly check for >= 13.1 (but I know such version > > checks are hard to > > >> >> > > > > > do in Makefile syntax)? > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > The thing 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? > > >> >> > > > > > "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h" is a > > plain, generated JNI > > >> >> > > > > > header file. If XLC 13 has problems to parse it, > > there should be much > > >> >> > > > > > more places which need fixing. I think that part of > > your change needs > > >> >> > > > > > a closer evaluation. > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Thank you and best regards, > > >> >> > > > > > Volker > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8202322&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- > > >> >> > > > > > siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf- > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=SD6UdjysISJRBlWUm8pEzF5lRZ5opfbrKzEh_jrOras&s=JAEK6rePGMPinZzOquHBzj5oc7vA3kaFt9x0WIIUzvk&e= > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > ..Thomas > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Best Regards > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Adam Farley > > >> >> > > > > > > > IBM Runtimes > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > "Thomas Stüfe" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> wrote on 20/11/ > > >> >> > 201816:44:07: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > From: "Thomas Stüfe" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Cc: Java Core Libs <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Date: 20/11/2018 16:48 > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK will not build > > >> >> > on AIX while > > >> >> > > > > > > > > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Hi Adam, > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 5:12 PM Adam Farley8 > > >> >> > > > > > <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Hi Tom, > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Sounds reasonable. I've added a webex to the > > bug, and here's a > > >> >> > > > > > > > > link to the bug. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url? > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8214063&d=DwIFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx- > > >> >> > > > > > > > > siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf- > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=z8YYwBXEfN7UtX1suPjpp9CZSHf8v0GrIMK3XGIC9VY&s=81TP9mIjhYD2Hmt8g7p2EHWRZXgiep21hxKLYRU7zIQ&e= > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > 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 to an > > >> >> > imported symbol." > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > We believe this is caused by JNIEXPORT and > > JNIIMPORTnot being > > >> >> > > > > > > > > defined. Without > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > this, almost no symbols are exported from > > shared libraries > > >> >> > > > > > due to use of > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -qvisibility=hidden as specified in make/ > > lib/LibCommon.gmk. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Yes but what I try to understand is why does this > > >> >> > happen now with > > >> >> > > > > > > > > xlc13? Did xlc change the rules for -qvisibility from > > >> >> > v12 to v13 ? > > >> >> > > > > > > > > That would be quite a break in backward compatibility. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > For convenience, here's a summary of the diffs: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > File 1 of 2) src/java.base/share/native/libjimage/ > > >> >> > > > > > NativeImageBuffer.cpp > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #include "osSupport.hpp" > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > +#if defined(__xlC__) && (__xlC__ >= 0x0d01) > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > +/* > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + * Version 13.1.3 of xlc seems to have > > trouble parsing the > > >> >> > > > > > `__attribute__` > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + * annotation in the generated header file > > we're about to > > >> >> > > > > > > > > include. Repeating > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + * the forward declaration (without the > > braces) here avoids > > >> >> > > > > > the diagnostic: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + * 1540-0040 (S) The text "void" is unexpected. > > >> >> > "visibility" > > >> >> > > > > > > > > may be undeclared or ambiguous. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + */ > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > +extern "C" JNIEXPORT jobject JNICALL > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > Java_jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer_getNativeMap(JNIEnv *, > > >> >> > > > > > > > > jclass, jstring); > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > +#endif > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #include "jdk_internal_jimage_NativeImageBuffer.h" > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > File 2 of 2) src/java.base/unix/native/ > > include/jni_md.h > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #define JNIIMPORT __attribute__((visibility > > >> >> > ("default"))) > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #endif > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > +#elif defined(__xlC__) && (__xlC__ >= 0x0d01) /* > > >> >> > xlc version 13.1 > > >> >> > > > > > > > > or better required */ > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + #define JNIEXPORT __attribute__((visibility > > >> >> > ("default"))) > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > + #define JNIIMPORT __attribute__((visibility > > >> >> > ("default"))) > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #else > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > #define JNIEXPORT > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Cheers, Thomas > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Best Regards > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Adam Farley > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > IBM Runtimes > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > "Thomas Stüfe" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > wrote on 19/11/ > > >> >> > > > 201818:11:34: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > From: "Thomas Stüfe" <thomas.stu...@gmail.com> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Java Core Libs > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > <core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net> > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Date: 19/11/2018 18:12 > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8214063: OpenJDK > > will not build > > >> >> > > > on AIX while > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > using the xlc 13.1 compiler > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > 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 another link > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > to some J9 issue. We are really strapped > > for manpower and > > >> >> > > > > > the AIX port > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > eats up enough time as it is. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Thomas > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 6:28 PM Adam Farley8 > > >> >> > > > > > > > > <adam.far...@uk.ibm.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Hi All > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Both the problem and the solution > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > appearstraight- > > >> >> > > > 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 > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > 741598. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North > > Harbour, Portsmouth, > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Hampshire PO6 3AU > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England > > >> >> > and Wales with > > >> >> > > > > > > > > number 741598. > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, > > Portsmouth, > > >> >> > > > > > Hampshire PO6 3AU > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > >> >> > > > > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in > > England and Wales > > >> >> > > > > > with number 741598. > > >> >> > > > > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, > > >> >> > > > Hampshire PO6 3AU > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > >> >> > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England andWales > > >> >> > > > > with > > >> >> > > > number 741598. > > >> >> > > > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, > > >> >> > Hampshire PO6 3AU > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > Unless stated otherwise above: > > >> >> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with > > >> >> > number 741598. > > >> >> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, > > Hampshire PO6 3AU > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> Unless stated otherwise above: > > >> >> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with > > >> >> number 741598. > > >> >> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 > > >> >> 3AU > > >> > > Unless stated otherwise above: > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number > 741598. > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU