Re: RFR: 8320691: Timeout handler on Windows takes 2 hours to complete [v2]

2023-11-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:51:07 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: >> test/failure_handler/src/share/conf/windows.properties line 60: >> >>> 58: >>> 59: native.core.app=cdb >>> 60: native.core.args=-c ".dump /ma core.%p;qd" -p %p >> >> Just to double check that this is the right option. `/ma` terminates

Re: RFR: 8320691: Timeout handler on Windows takes 2 hours to complete [v2]

2023-11-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:51:07 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: >> test/failure_handler/src/share/conf/windows.properties line 60: >> >>> 58: >>> 59: native.core.app=cdb >>> 60: native.core.args=-c ".dump /ma core.%p;qd" -p %p >> >> Just to double check that this is the right option. `/ma` terminates

Re: RFR: 8320691: Timeout handler on Windows takes 2 hours to complete

2023-11-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:58:18 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: > The recent cdb versions do not support `.dump /f`: > > * > * .dump /f is not supported on a user mode process. * > *

Re: RFR: 8320691: Timeout handler on Windows takes 2 hours to complete

2023-11-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:58:18 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: > The recent cdb versions do not support `.dump /f`: > > * > * .dump /f is not supported on a user mode process. * > *

Re: RFR: 8313816: Accessing jmethodID might lead to spurious crashes [v8]

2023-11-23 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 16:42:35 GMT, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> Please, review this fix for a corner case handling of `jmethodID` values. >> >> The issue is related to the interplay between `jmethodID` values and method >> redefinitions. Each `jmethodID` value is effectively a pointer to a `Meth

Re: RFR: JDK-8320005 : Native library suffix impact on hotspot code in AIX [v2]

2023-11-23 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:05:29 GMT, suchismith1993 wrote: > > I'm not a big fan of this approach. We accumulate more and more "#ifdef > > AIX" in shared code because of many recent AIX additions. No other platform > > has such a large ifdef footprint in shared code. > > I argue that all of this s

Re: RFR: 8313816: Accessing jmethodID might lead to spurious crashes [v2]

2023-11-23 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:15:54 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> @dholmes-ora >>> Can't we just check method->method_holder() for null rather than passing in >>> a parameter like this? >> >> I have removed the argument and I am now performing the c

Re: RFR: 8313816: Accessing jmethodID might lead to spurious crashes [v6]

2023-11-23 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:37:41 GMT, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> Please, review this fix for a corner case handling of `jmethodID` values. >> >> The issue is related to the interplay between `jmethodID` values and method >> redefinitions. Each `jmethodID` value is effectively a pointer to a `Meth

Re: RFR: 8313816: Accessing jmethodID might lead to spurious crashes [v2]

2023-11-23 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 08:44:08 GMT, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> Jaroslav Bachorik has updated the pull request incrementally with three >> additional commits since the last revision: >> >> - Clean up imports >> - Simplify Method::clear_jmethod_id() >> - Use correct copyrights > > @dholmes-ora

Re: RFR: JDK-8320005 : Native library suffix impact on hotspot code in AIX [v2]

2023-11-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 05:55:28 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> suchismith1993 has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> change macro position > > src/hotspot/os/aix/os_aix.cpp line 3069: > >&g

Re: RFR: JDK-8320005 : Native library suffix impact on hotspot code in AIX [v2]

2023-11-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 16:24:24 GMT, suchismith1993 wrote: >> J2SE agent does not start and throws error when it tries to find the shared >> library ibm_16_am. >> After searching for ibm_16_am.so ,the jvm agent throws and error as dll_load >> fails.It fails to identify the shared library ibm_16_am

Re: RFR: JDK-8320005 : Native library suffix impact on hotspot code in AIX [v2]

2023-11-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 16:24:24 GMT, suchismith1993 wrote: >> JDK-8320005 : Native library suffix impact on hotspot code in AIX > > suchismith1993 has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > change macro position Hi, is this patch meant

Re: RFR: JDK-8320309: AIX: pthreads created by foreign test library don't work as expected

2023-11-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 10:09:04 GMT, Varada M wrote: > Following test fails due to missing pthread attributes on AIX : > java/foreign/TestUpcallAsync.java > java/foreign/stackwalk/TestAsyncStackWalk.java > java/foreign/loaderLookup/TestLoaderLookupJNI.java > java/foreign/enablenativeaccess/TestEnabl

Re: RFR: 8320219: Actually resolve issues with goto labels in sspi [v3]

2023-11-17 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 04:40:53 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> I regret not actually addressing the issues with the goto labels in >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15996, where initialization of locals in >> sspi were jumped over by gotos to a certain label. I changed the >> initializations i

Re: RFR: 8320219: Actually resolve issues with goto labels in sspi [v3]

2023-11-17 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:04:07 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: > > Can you please describe the problem you are trying to solve, and why you > > think it is worth solving. You describe the thought process you went > > through while doing the patch and possibly some other, older patch. As it > > is, rea

Re: RFR: 8320219: Actually resolve issues with goto labels in sspi [v3]

2023-11-17 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 04:40:53 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> I regret not actually addressing the issues with the goto labels in >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15996, I've as such fixed the issues >> with them properly this time, by simply deleting the labels and duplicating >> the code w

Re: RFR: 8320053: GHA: Cross-compile gtest code [v2]

2023-11-15 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 11:04:43 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Looking at why GHA did not catch >> [JDK-8320050](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8320050), even though it >> builds hotspot, I realized we do not configure the build with gtest, which >> means we skip the build checks for gtest

Integrated: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683

2023-11-15 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 07:08:07 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: > When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). This pull request has now been integrated. Changes

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v6]

2023-11-15 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 06:22:58 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if >> an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test >> (verified). > > Thomas Stuefe has updated the p

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v6]

2023-11-14 Thread Thomas Stuefe
> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v5]

2023-11-14 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 15:03:42 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains six commits: >> >> - Merge branch 'master' into >> JDK-8318671-P

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v5]

2023-11-14 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 13:33:26 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if >> an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test >> (verified). > > Thomas Stuefe has updated the p

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v5]

2023-11-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull reque

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v4]

2023-11-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 11:51:30 GMT, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I think this is ready for integration given that both @dholmes-ora and > @jdksjolen are okay with it. Well, they did not approve yet; @jdksjolen or @dholmes-ora, if you are happy with this, could you hit the big green button please? -

Integrated: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map

2023-11-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 10:08:49 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: > Analysts and supporters often use /proc/xx/maps to make sense of the memory > footprint of a process. > > Interpreting the memory map correctly can help when used as a complement to > other tools (e.g. NMT). There even

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-13 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 07:03:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >>> > As this adds a JCmd, doesn't this need both a CSR and a manual entry? >>> >>> * CSR: not sure; there are precedences for going with CSR and without >>> CSR. Since we get awfully close to JDK22 freeze, I would prefer for a CSR >>> n

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v12]

2023-11-10 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 10 Nov 2023 09:45:11 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Thanks for your hard work on this! LGTM. Thank you for your Review, Johan! - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16301#issuecomment-1805489022

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 07:03:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >>> > As this adds a JCmd, doesn't this need both a CSR and a manual entry? >>> >>> * CSR: not sure; there are precedences for going with CSR and without >>> CSR. Since we get awfully close to JDK22 freeze, I would prefer for a CSR >>> n

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v12]

2023-11-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 07:27:37 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Fix another windows error > > src/hotspot/share/services/diagnosticCommand.cpp lin

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v11]

2023-11-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v10]

2023-11-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-08 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 9 Nov 2023 07:03:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > > > > As this adds a JCmd, doesn't this need both a CSR and a manual entry? > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > * CSR: not sure; there are precedences for going with CSR and without > > > CSR. Since we get awfully close to JDK22 freeze, I would pr

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-08 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 09:51:12 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: > As this adds a JCmd, doesn't this need both a CSR and a manual entry? - CSR: not sure; there are precedences for going with CSR and without CSR. Since we get awfully close to JDK22 freeze, I would prefer for a CSR not to be needed. Also wo

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-03 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:04:30 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > OK, went through the cache. Will continue later. @jdksjolen any

Re: RFR: JDK-8313790: [arm32] Specify -marm when building without an ABI profile [v2]

2023-11-03 Thread Thomas Stuefe
can cause really rare but > tricky problems when combining static assembly and C++ code (See e.g. > JDK-8288719). > > I propose to always specify `-marm` as default, unless an ABI profile is > given, to prevent such errors. > > Thanks to @marchof for testing this. Thomas Stuefe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-03 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 17:42:29 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> Analysts and supporters often use /proc/xx/maps to make sense of the memory >> footprint of a process. >> >> Interpreting the memory map correctly can help when used as a complement to >> other tools (e.g

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 15:25:14 GMT, Brice Dutheil wrote: >> This prints protection and offset. The former is interesting for obvious >> reasons (e.g. lets you tell apart stack guard regions from stack, or >> uncommitted from committed regions) and the latter interesting for some >> corner cases (

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v9]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v8]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v7]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 15:38:46 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: > LGTM > > Thank you for doing this! Thank you for reviewing, @gerard-ziemski ! - PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16301#issuecomment-1790665200

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:04:04 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/share/nmt/memMapPrinter.cpp line 119: > >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:46:21 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Yes, it resulted in a significant performance gain for a test run where I >> interleaved non-committed and committed memory of the same tag. I may have >> been mistaken, of course. > > It being committed or reserved shouldn't matter (I ass

Re: RFR: 8307160: Fix AWT/2D/A11Y to support the permissive- flag on the Microsoft Visual C compiler [v13]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 11:02:27 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> We should set the -permissive- flag for the Microsoft Visual C compiler, as >> was requested by the now backed out >> [JDK-8241499](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8241499). Doing so makes >> the Visual C compiler much less accepting

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v18]

2023-11-02 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:59:59 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> A bug in GCC causes shared libraries linked with -ffast-math to disable >> denormal arithmetic. This breaks Java's floating-point semantics. >> >> The bug is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522 >> >> One solution is to sav

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 10:01:43 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/share/nmt/memMapPrinter.cpp line 105: > >>

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v7]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 09:48:39 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/share/nmt/memMapPrinter.cpp line 99: > >>

Re: RFR: 8317132: Prepare HotSpot for permissive- [v10]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 06:58:23 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> I've removed the goto, but would like to wait until Thomas is back > > No response from @tstuefe but I think the empty block is pointless and we > should just check `if (!InterceptOSException) {`. Sure, remove the empty block. ---

Re: RFR: 8317132: Prepare HotSpot for permissive- [v10]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 08:37:44 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> Ick! I hadn't followed https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/15096 closely, so >> hadn't noticed the discussion there. Not sure why this is using a literal 0 >> rather than `(T) '\n'` as in that PR? >> >> So the literal "0" (or previously,

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-11-01 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:08:15 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/share/nmt/memMapPrinter.cpp line 79: > >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-10-31 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 31 Oct 2023 16:58:19 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/os/linux/memMapPrinter_linux

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-10-31 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 17:31:30 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/os/linux/memMapPrinter_linux.cpp line 83: &g

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-10-31 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 10:29:56 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> fix various builds > > src/hotspot/os/linux/memMapPrinter_linux.cpp line 80: > &g

RFR: JDK-8313790: [arm32] Specify -marm when building without an ABI profile

2023-10-30 Thread Thomas Stuefe
See [JDK-8288719](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288719) and subsequent [discussion](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2022-May/034635.html) back in 2022. On Arm, we can generate either arm- or thumb-code (`-marm` or `-mthumb`). At the moment, if we don't specify an ABI profil

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v4]

2023-10-30 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 10:13:02 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Fix Windows build > > test/hotspot/jtreg/compiler/compilercontrol/commands/MemStatTest

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v4]

2023-10-30 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 10:22:06 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: > Ouch, I just realized that we can't differentiate between being provided with > the literal number 2 and `MemStatAction::print` anymore since you moved the > literal number parsing into this function. That means that we can't set > `print

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v6]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:42:19 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v5]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v4]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 20:20:49 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with three >> additional commits since the last revision: >> >> - Fix spelling >> - timeout fuse >> - Feedback Johan > > src/hotspo

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v4]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 15:42:06 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with three >> additional commits since the last revision: >> >> - Fix spelling >> - timeout fuse >> - Feedback Johan > > Taking a

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v4]

2023-10-28 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 22:01:07 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with three >> additional commits since the last revision: >> >> - Fix spelling >> - timeout fuse >> - Feedback Johan > > src/hotspot

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v4]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 17:29:23 GMT, Gerard Ziemski wrote: > I really like this feature, hope the other platforms can be done as well. (I > am also really looking forward to seeing how you did the "malloc" version) > > I think we should set the user expectations correctly and say somewhere that >

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v15]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:49:16 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: > > One more thought, it would be good to add the FTZ_mode_enabled check to > > `os::run_periodic_checks()`. > > We already do signal handler checks there, and it is the right place to > > check for "global things third party native code may

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:42:19 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v4]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:41:28 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:37:19 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 09:32:35 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-27 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 08:38:02 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: >> Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains four commits: >> >> - Merge master and solve merge conflicts >> - small fixe

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v4]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v15]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 14:17:02 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> A bug in GCC causes shared libraries linked with -ffast-math to disable >> denormal arithmetic. This breaks Java's floating-point semantics. >> >> The bug is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522 >> >> One solution is to sav

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v15]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 14:17:02 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> A bug in GCC causes shared libraries linked with -ffast-math to disable >> denormal arithmetic. This breaks Java's floating-point semantics. >> >> The bug is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522 >> >> One solution is to sav

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v3]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
e run): > > [example_system_map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13179054/example_system_map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet >

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map [v2]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
system.map.txt](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/files/13062903/example.system.map.txt) > > This patch adds the VM annotations for VMAs that are *mmaped*. I also have an > experimental patch that works with malloc'ed memory, but it is not ready yet > for consumption and I leav

Re: RFR: 8009550: PlatformPCSC should load versioned so [v2]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 14:19:32 GMT, Andrew John Hughes wrote: >>> > Hi @gnu-andrew, >>> > in your last example, why does it look for both arm and x64 packages? And >>> > why for kFreeBsd? I see you have both hardcoded, why? >>> > I would expect it only to attempt and pick up the architecture and O

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v3]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 26 Oct 2023 08:58:13 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if >> an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test >> (verified). > > Thomas Stuefe has updated the p

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v3]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 22:16:03 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >>> If "omitting value means 'collect'" then why do we not simply set value = >>> (uintx)MemStatAction::collect ? Otherwise what is that message supposed to >>> mean? >> >> We only enter this function if a value for this command had been gi

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v3]

2023-10-26 Thread Thomas Stuefe
> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revis

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683 [v2]

2023-10-25 Thread Thomas Stuefe
> When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if > an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test > (verified). Thomas Stuefe has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental

Re: RFR: 8317510: Change Windows debug symbol files naming to avoid losing info when an executable and a library share the same name [v3]

2023-10-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 10:21:58 GMT, Frederic Thevenet wrote: >> When building OpenJDK on Windows using "--with-native-debug-info=external", >> the resulting debug symbols are saved in files located in the same folder as >> the corresponding executable or library and named by swapping the extensio

Re: RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683

2023-10-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 10:26:32 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > If "omitting value means 'collect'" then why do we not simply set value = > (uintx)MemStatAction::collect ? Otherwise what is that message supposed to > mean? We only enter this function if a value for this command had been given (`-XX:C

RFR: JDK-8318671: Potential uninitialized uintx value after JDK-8317683

2023-10-24 Thread Thomas Stuefe
When using 'MemStat' CompileCommand, we accidentally register the command if an invalid suboption had been specified. Fixed, added regression test (verified). - Commit messages: - JDK-8318671-Potential-uninitialized-uintx-value-after-JDK-8317683 Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map

2023-10-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 01:39:16 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: >> Analysts and supporters often use /proc/xx/maps to make sense of the memory >> footprint of a process. >> >> Interpreting the memory map correctly can help when used as a complement to >> other tools (e.g. NMT). There even exist tools o

Re: RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map

2023-10-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 01:39:16 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote: > The hs_err file includes a dump of the maps file. It seems these annotations > would be useful there also. I thought about this too. The problem is the printing may take long since it is O^2 (iterate through VMAs, for each one iterate NM

RFR: JDK-8318636: Add jcmd to print annotated process memory map

2023-10-22 Thread Thomas Stuefe
Analysts and supporters often use /proc/xx/maps to make sense of the memory footprint of a process. Interpreting the memory map correctly can help when used as a complement to other tools (e.g. NMT). There even exist tools out there that attempt to annotate the process memory map with JVM infor

Re: RFR: 8318447: Move NMT source code to own subdirectory

2023-10-20 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 20:06:50 GMT, Johan Sjölen wrote: > I think that NMT is deserving of its own subdirectory. Can we do a review of > the changes before I fix the merge conflicts? > > 1. Moved all the nmt source code from services/ to nmt/ > 2. Renamed all the include statements and sorted the

Re: RFR: 8318058: Notify the jvm when the direct memory is oom

2023-10-12 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 03:23:04 GMT, xpbob wrote: > Big data processes often experience situations where the direct memory oom > process is alive but not serving properly. If the direct memory is oom, code > can notify the jvm. Can bring the following benefits: > 1. Analysis of direct memory Java.

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: ProcessHandle implementation listing processes on AIX should use getprocs64 [v5]

2023-10-12 Thread Thomas Stuefe
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 the child list; at least intermitt

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java fails intermittent on AIX in TreeTest.test5 [v4]

2023-10-12 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 09:33:24 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote: >> src/java.base/aix/native/libjava/ProcessHandleImpl_aix.c line 89: >> >>> 87: >>> 88: do { // Block to break out of on Exception >>> 89: pids = (*env)->GetLongArrayElements(env, jarray, NULL); >> >> Nit, I'd move these invocat

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java fails intermittent on AIX in TreeTest.test5 [v4]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 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 intermitt

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v8]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:20:18 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> src/hotspot/os/bsd/os_bsd.cpp line 976: >> >>> 974: // same architecture as Hotspot is running on >>> 975: >>> 976: void *os::Bsd::dlopen_helper(const char *filename, int mode) { >> >> I thought BSD is switching to clang. > > What differ

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v8]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:36:01 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: >> A bug in GCC causes shared libraries linked with -ffast-math to disable >> denormal arithmetic. This breaks Java's floating-point semantics. >> >> The bug is https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55522 >> >> One solution is to sav

Re: RFR: 8295159: DSO created with -ffast-math breaks Java floating-point arithmetic [v7]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:38:57 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote: > > I'm seeing one automated test failure on Linux x86, which I don't > > understand because I've excluded that test for generic-i586. If anyone > > understands this, please shout up. > > For avoidance of doubt, the test doesn't run locally

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java fails intermittent on AIX in TreeTest.test5 [v4]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 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 intermitt

Re: RFR: 8317510: Change Windows debug symbol files naming to avoid losing info when an executable and a library share the same name [v3]

2023-10-11 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 02:18:15 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: > Once integrated, this is going to spam everyone on GitHub with Windows test > failures until the issue is fixed separately :/ (Could we perhaps split the > test out into another change?) I don't think @fthevenet plans on checking in a br

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java fails intermittent on AIX in TreeTest.test5 [v2]

2023-10-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 15:15:52 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote: > Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system lead to double > pids in the child list; at least intermittent. Using the API getprocs64() > instead I was able to eliminate those double pids (and increase the > performance by

Re: RFR: JDK-8315026: java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java fails intermittent on AIX in TreeTest.test5 [v2]

2023-10-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
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 children expected [2] but found [3] >> at org.test

Re: RFR: 8317510: Change Windows debug symbol files naming to avoid losing info when an executable and a library share the same name [v3]

2023-10-09 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 14:02:19 GMT, Frederic Thevenet wrote: > OK, so unsurprisingly I was indeed wrong... The test ran as part or tier1 in > the GHA checks - and failed. I'll let other advise on whether or not running > this is tier1 is appropriate or not, but in the meantime I'll try to figure

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >