Re: RFR: 8273459: Update code segment alignment to 64 bytes [v4]

2021-09-29 Thread Jie Fu
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 17:31:24 GMT, Scott Gibbons wrote: >> Change the default code entry alignment to 64 bytes from 32 bytes. This >> allows for maintaining proper 64-byte alignment of data within a code >> segment, which is required by several AVX-512 instructions. >> >> I ran into this

Re: RFR: 8274329: Fix non-portable HotSpot code in MethodMatcher::parse_method_pattern

2021-09-29 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:55:00 GMT, Jie Fu wrote: > Hi all, > > I tried to build OpenJDK on Cygwin (Windows 2016 + VS2019). > However, I failed with C4474 and C4778 warnings as below: > > Compiling 100 properties into resource bundles for java.desktop > Compiling 3038 files for java.base >

Re: RFR: 8274329: Fix non-portable HotSpot code in MethodMatcher::parse_method_pattern

2021-09-29 Thread Vladimir Kozlov
On Sun, 26 Sep 2021 09:55:00 GMT, Jie Fu wrote: > Hi all, > > I tried to build OpenJDK on Cygwin (Windows 2016 + VS2019). > However, I failed with C4474 and C4778 warnings as below: > > Compiling 100 properties into resource bundles for java.desktop > Compiling 3038 files for java.base >

Re: RFR: 8245095: Implementation of JEP 408: Simple Web Server [v8]

2021-09-29 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Wed, 29 Sep 2021 11:02:05 GMT, Julia Boes wrote: >> This change implements a simple web server that can be run on the >> command-line with `java -m jdk.httpserver`. >> >> This is facilitated by adding an entry point for the `jdk.httpserver` >> module, an implementation class whose main

Re: RFR: 8245095: Implementation of JEP 408: Simple Web Server [v8]

2021-09-29 Thread Julia Boes
> This change implements a simple web server that can be run on the > command-line with `java -m jdk.httpserver`. > > This is facilitated by adding an entry point for the `jdk.httpserver` module, > an implementation class whose main method is run when the above command is > executed. This is

Re: RFR: 8245095: Implementation of JEP 408: Simple Web Server

2021-09-29 Thread Julia Boes
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 10:30:21 GMT, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > * For all interfaces use "-b 0.0.0.0" (IPv4) or "-b ::" (IPv6) > > Instead of: > > * For 0.0.0.0 (all interfaces) use -b 0.0.0.0 or -b ::0 > > In the usage? > > (I think ?::? is canon?) Good point, "::" is recommended, e.g. in