Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On Fri, 2018-08-31 at 13:42 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 08/31/2018 01:40 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > > Yes, that looks reasonable! If you want to, you can push this + Klose's > > fix. > > Is there a bug in the JBS I can reference? https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440 Thanks, Severin
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On 08/31/2018 01:40 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > Yes, that looks reasonable! If you want to, you can push this + Klose's fix. Is there a bug in the JBS I can reference? Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
Yes, that looks reasonable! If you want to, you can push this + Klose's fix.
/Magnus
> 31 aug. 2018 kl. 13:25 skrev John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> :
>
> Hi Magnus!
>
> I just tested it and the following change in make/autoconf/flags.m4 is
> necessary as well so that gcc is not called with "-m64":
>
> diff -r 18afb2097ada -r 1f28530b1f46 make/autoconf/flags.m4
> --- a/make/autoconf/flags.m4Fri Aug 31 11:43:06 2018 +0200
> +++ b/make/autoconf/flags.m4Fri Aug 31 12:50:02 2018 +0200
> @@ -241,7 +241,8 @@
> elif test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xsolstudio; then
> MACHINE_FLAG="-m${OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_BITS}"
> elif test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xgcc || test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xclang;
> then
> -if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xx86 ||
> +if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xx86 &&
> +test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU" != xx32 ||
> test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xsparc ||
> test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xppc; then
> MACHINE_FLAG="-m${OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_BITS}"
>
> Adrian
>
>> On 08/31/2018 10:43 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> The necroposter strikes back! :-)
>>
>> I'm currently trying to fix or close all long standing bugs on
>> infrastructure/build, and now the time has come to JDK-8165440.
>>
>> This patch had a bit of bad timing when it was posted, since it could not be
>> accepted into mainline due to feature freeze, and there were no other repo
>> to accept it.
>>
>> I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts
>> of it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if
>> this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for
>> jdk/jdk for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch.
>>
>> diff --git a/make/autoconf/platform.m4 b/make/autoconf/platform.m4
>> --- a/make/autoconf/platform.m4
>> +++ b/make/autoconf/platform.m4
>> @@ -35,6 +35,10 @@
>>VAR_CPU_ARCH=x86
>>VAR_CPU_BITS=64
>>VAR_CPU_ENDIAN=little
>> + case "$host" in *x32)
>> +VAR_CPU=x32
>> +VAR_CPU_BITS=32
>> + esac
>>;;
>> i?86)
>>VAR_CPU=x86
>> @@ -455,6 +459,8 @@
>> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=IA32
>>elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx86_64; then
>> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=AMD64
>> + elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx32; then
>> +HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=X32
>>elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xsparcv9; then
>> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=SPARC
>>elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xaarch64; then
>> diff --git a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
>> b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
>> --- a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
>> +++ b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
>> @@ -1742,7 +1742,7 @@
>>
>> #if (defined IA32)
>>static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_386;
>> -#elif (defined AMD64)
>> +#elif (defined AMD64) || defined(X32)
>>static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_X86_64;
>> #elif (defined IA64)
>>static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_IA_64;
>>
>> /Magnus
>>
>>> On 2016-09-06 01:01, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Severin, Matthias,
>>>
On 5/09/2016 10:16 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64-
> linux-gnux32
> target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk.
>
> - the build system currently only derives the target from
>the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough
>for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the
>triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere.
>
> - the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu"
>
> - GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white
>decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However
>the real patch should be to get these flags from the build
>system, and not hardcode itself.
>
> - the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and
>just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view
>the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other
>targets without including it. If you want to keep the include,
>then it should be guarded with
>#if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__))
>
> Matthias
I've filed this bug for this:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440
>>>
>>> Please note that as a P4 issue this can not be fixed given we have hit RDP1:
>>>
>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2016-August/004777.html
>>>
>>> Further this is filed as "bug" but seems to clearly be an enhancement, so
>>> you would need approval for it to come in post-Feature-Complete.
>>>
>>> Please consider if this is something that must be fixed for 9 or can be
>>> deferred. Otherwise you will need to follow additional approval processes.
>>>
>>> Sorry.
>>>
>>> David (just the
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
Hi Magnus!
I just tested it and the following change in make/autoconf/flags.m4 is
necessary as well so that gcc is not called with "-m64":
diff -r 18afb2097ada -r 1f28530b1f46 make/autoconf/flags.m4
--- a/make/autoconf/flags.m4Fri Aug 31 11:43:06 2018 +0200
+++ b/make/autoconf/flags.m4Fri Aug 31 12:50:02 2018 +0200
@@ -241,7 +241,8 @@
elif test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xsolstudio; then
MACHINE_FLAG="-m${OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_BITS}"
elif test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xgcc || test "x$TOOLCHAIN_TYPE" = xclang; then
-if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xx86 ||
+if test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xx86 &&
+test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU" != xx32 ||
test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xsparc ||
test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH" = xppc; then
MACHINE_FLAG="-m${OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_BITS}"
Adrian
On 08/31/2018 10:43 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> The necroposter strikes back! :-)
>
> I'm currently trying to fix or close all long standing bugs on
> infrastructure/build, and now the time has come to JDK-8165440.
>
> This patch had a bit of bad timing when it was posted, since it could not be
> accepted into mainline due to feature freeze, and there were no other repo to
> accept it.
>
> I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts of
> it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if
> this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for jdk/jdk
> for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch.
>
> diff --git a/make/autoconf/platform.m4 b/make/autoconf/platform.m4
> --- a/make/autoconf/platform.m4
> +++ b/make/autoconf/platform.m4
> @@ -35,6 +35,10 @@
> VAR_CPU_ARCH=x86
> VAR_CPU_BITS=64
> VAR_CPU_ENDIAN=little
> + case "$host" in *x32)
> + VAR_CPU=x32
> + VAR_CPU_BITS=32
> + esac
> ;;
> i?86)
> VAR_CPU=x86
> @@ -455,6 +459,8 @@
> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=IA32
> elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx86_64; then
> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=AMD64
> + elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx32; then
> + HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=X32
> elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xsparcv9; then
> HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=SPARC
> elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xaarch64; then
> diff --git a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
> b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
> --- a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
> +++ b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp
> @@ -1742,7 +1742,7 @@
>
> #if (defined IA32)
> static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_386;
> -#elif (defined AMD64)
> +#elif (defined AMD64) || defined(X32)
> static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_X86_64;
> #elif (defined IA64)
> static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_IA_64;
>
> /Magnus
>
> On 2016-09-06 01:01, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Severin, Matthias,
>>
>> On 5/09/2016 10:16 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64-
linux-gnux32
target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk.
- the build system currently only derives the target from
the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough
for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the
triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere.
- the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu"
- GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white
decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However
the real patch should be to get these flags from the build
system, and not hardcode itself.
- the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and
just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view
the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other
targets without including it. If you want to keep the include,
then it should be guarded with
#if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__))
Matthias
>>>
>>> I've filed this bug for this:
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440
>>
>> Please note that as a P4 issue this can not be fixed given we have hit RDP1:
>>
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2016-August/004777.html
>>
>> Further this is filed as "bug" but seems to clearly be an enhancement, so
>> you would need approval for it to come in post-Feature-Complete.
>>
>> Please consider if this is something that must be fixed for 9 or can be
>> deferred. Otherwise you will need to follow additional approval processes.
>>
>> Sorry.
>>
>> David (just the messenger!)
>>
>>> Unfortunately, I have no way of testing it.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Severin
>>>
--
.''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org
`. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de
`-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On 08/31/2018 11:19 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > Hah! That's exactly the same patch as I derived. :-) Great. > So that means, I assume, that the patch has been tested properly? If so I'll > just sponsor and push it. (sid-x32-sbuild)root@epyc:/# file /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-x32/bin/java /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-x32/bin/java: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /libx32/ld-linux-x32.so.2, for GNU/Linux 3.4.0, BuildID[sha1]=feec974bc65365772119c032d534e49839f8df8f, stripped (sid-x32-sbuild)root@epyc:/# /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-x32/bin/java --version openjdk 11 2018-09-25 OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 11+27-Debian-1) OpenJDK Zero VM (build 11+27-Debian-1, interpreted mode) (sid-x32-sbuild)root@epyc:/# Yes. Go ahead, please :-). Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On 2018-08-31 10:57, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: On 08/31/2018 10:43 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts of it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for jdk/jdk for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch. I can test it. Didn't know that Matthias posted a patch for x32 support. The current patch that the Debian openjdk-11 package is using at the moment can be found in [1]. Hah! That's exactly the same patch as I derived. :-) So that means, I assume, that the patch has been tested properly? If so I'll just sponsor and push it. /Magnus Adrian [1] https://sources.debian.org/src/openjdk-11/11%7E27-1/debian/patches/zero-x32.diff/
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On 08/31/2018 10:57 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 08/31/2018 10:43 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts >> of it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if >> this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for >> jdk/jdk for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch. > I can test it. Didn't know that Matthias posted a patch for x32 > support. The current patch that the Debian openjdk-11 package > is using at the moment can be found in [1]. Oh, and here's the build log of openjdk-11 in Debian with that patch [1]. Adrian > [1] > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=openjdk-11=x32=11%7E27-1=1534788109=0 -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On 08/31/2018 10:43 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts of > it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if > this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for jdk/jdk > for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch. I can test it. Didn't know that Matthias posted a patch for x32 support. The current patch that the Debian openjdk-11 package is using at the moment can be found in [1]. Adrian > [1] > https://sources.debian.org/src/openjdk-11/11%7E27-1/debian/patches/zero-x32.diff/ -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `-GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
The necroposter strikes back! :-) I'm currently trying to fix or close all long standing bugs on infrastructure/build, and now the time has come to JDK-8165440. This patch had a bit of bad timing when it was posted, since it could not be accepted into mainline due to feature freeze, and there were no other repo to accept it. I adjusted the patch to the current code base (which means that most parts of it were not needed). What remains are two files. However, I can't test if this works. Matthias, can you verify that this is a working patch for jdk/jdk for the gnux32 target? If so, I'll sponsor this patch. diff --git a/make/autoconf/platform.m4 b/make/autoconf/platform.m4 --- a/make/autoconf/platform.m4 +++ b/make/autoconf/platform.m4 @@ -35,6 +35,10 @@ VAR_CPU_ARCH=x86 VAR_CPU_BITS=64 VAR_CPU_ENDIAN=little + case "$host" in *x32) + VAR_CPU=x32 + VAR_CPU_BITS=32 + esac ;; i?86) VAR_CPU=x86 @@ -455,6 +459,8 @@ HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=IA32 elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx86_64; then HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=AMD64 + elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xx32; then + HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=X32 elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xsparcv9; then HOTSPOT_$1_CPU_DEFINE=SPARC elif test "x$OPENJDK_$1_CPU" = xaarch64; then diff --git a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp --- a/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp +++ b/src/hotspot/os/linux/os_linux.cpp @@ -1742,7 +1742,7 @@ #if (defined IA32) static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_386; -#elif (defined AMD64) +#elif (defined AMD64) || defined(X32) static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_X86_64; #elif (defined IA64) static Elf32_Half running_arch_code=EM_IA_64; /Magnus On 2016-09-06 01:01, David Holmes wrote: Hi Severin, Matthias, On 5/09/2016 10:16 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64- linux-gnux32 target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk. - the build system currently only derives the target from the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere. - the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu" - GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However the real patch should be to get these flags from the build system, and not hardcode itself. - the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other targets without including it. If you want to keep the include, then it should be guarded with #if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__)) Matthias I've filed this bug for this: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440 Please note that as a P4 issue this can not be fixed given we have hit RDP1: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2016-August/004777.html Further this is filed as "bug" but seems to clearly be an enhancement, so you would need approval for it to come in post-Feature-Complete. Please consider if this is something that must be fixed for 9 or can be deferred. Otherwise you will need to follow additional approval processes. Sorry. David (just the messenger!) Unfortunately, I have no way of testing it. Cheers, Severin
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
Hi Severin, Matthias, On 5/09/2016 10:16 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64- linux-gnux32 target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk. - the build system currently only derives the target from the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere. - the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu" - GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However the real patch should be to get these flags from the build system, and not hardcode itself. - the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other targets without including it. If you want to keep the include, then it should be guarded with #if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__)) Matthias I've filed this bug for this: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440 Please note that as a P4 issue this can not be fixed given we have hit RDP1: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2016-August/004777.html Further this is filed as "bug" but seems to clearly be an enhancement, so you would need approval for it to come in post-Feature-Complete. Please consider if this is something that must be fixed for 9 or can be deferred. Otherwise you will need to follow additional approval processes. Sorry. David (just the messenger!) Unfortunately, I have no way of testing it. Cheers, Severin
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
On Mon, 2016-09-05 at 14:03 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64- > linux-gnux32 > target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk. > > - the build system currently only derives the target from > the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough > for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the > triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere. > > - the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu" > > - GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white > decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However > the real patch should be to get these flags from the build > system, and not hardcode itself. > > - the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and > just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view > the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other > targets without including it. If you want to keep the include, > then it should be guarded with > #if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__)) > > Matthias I've filed this bug for this: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165440 Unfortunately, I have no way of testing it. Cheers, Severin
Re: [patch] add zero support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 target
Build changes look ok. /Erik On 2016-09-05 14:03, Matthias Klose wrote: The attached patch adds support for building zero for the x86_64-linux-gnux32 target, having changes in the build system, hotspot and jdk. - the build system currently only derives the target from the cpu in PLATFORM_EXTRACT_VARS_FROM_CPU; that is not enough for the new target, which only differs by the ending of the triplet. However the $host macro should be available anywhere. - the hotspot part just handles the new "cpu" - GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk assumes that there is a black/white decision about -m32/-m64. The patch works around it. However the real patch should be to get these flags from the build system, and not hardcode itself. - the sysctl system call is unsupported in the x32 kernel, and just the include leads to a build error. From my point of view the header is not needed. I had successful builds on all other targets without including it. If you want to keep the include, then it should be guarded with #if !(defined(_ILP32) && defined(__x86_64__)) Matthias
