dk.java.net>; build-dev
> Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR: 8073139: PPC64: User-visible arch directory and
> os.arch value on ppc64le cause issues with Java tooling
>
> Hi Goetz,
>
> On Tue, 2018-10-02 at 10:40 +, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> [...]
> > Did you test this o
> > From: ppc-aix-port-dev On
> > Behalf Of Severin Gehwolf
> > Sent: Dienstag, 2. Oktober 2018 12:34
> > To: Erik Joelsson ; hotspot-dev > d...@openjdk.java.net>; ppc-aix-port-dev > d...@openjdk.java.net>; build-dev
> > Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR:
Severin
>
> > Best regards,
> > Goetz.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Severin Gehwolf
> > > Sent: Dienstag, 2. Oktober 2018 13:09
> > > To: Lindenmaier, Goetz ; Erik Joelsson
> > > ; hotspot-dev &
Erik Joelsson
> > ; hotspot-dev > d...@openjdk.java.net>; ppc-aix-port-dev > d...@openjdk.java.net>; build-dev
> > Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR: 8073139: PPC64: User-visible arch directory
> > and
> > os.arch value on ppc64le cause issues with Java to
. Oktober 2018 13:09
> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz ; Erik Joelsson
> ; hotspot-dev d...@openjdk.java.net>; ppc-aix-port-dev d...@openjdk.java.net>; build-dev
> Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR: 8073139: PPC64: User-visible arch directory and
> os.arch value on ppc64le cause issues with
.java.net>; ppc-aix-port-dev > d...@openjdk.java.net>; build-dev
> > Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR: 8073139: PPC64: User-visible arch directory
> > and
> > os.arch value on ppc64le cause issues with Java tooling
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Pinging P
ktober 2018 12:34
> To: Erik Joelsson ; hotspot-dev d...@openjdk.java.net>; ppc-aix-port-dev d...@openjdk.java.net>; build-dev
> Subject: Re: [PING] [8u] RFR: 8073139: PPC64: User-visible arch directory and
> os.arch value on ppc64le cause issues with Java tooling
>
> Hi,
&g
Hi,
Pinging PPC porters. Does this look reasonable to you?
Thanks,
Severin
On Fri, 2018-09-28 at 08:56 -0700, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Build changes look ok to me.
>
> /Erik
>
>
> On 2018-09-26 04:26, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could I please get reviews for this JDK 8 backport wh
On Fri, 2018-09-28 at 08:56 -0700, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Build changes look ok to me.
Thanks for the review, Erik!
Cheers,
Severin
> /Erik
>
>
> On 2018-09-26 04:26, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could I please get reviews for this JDK 8 backport which fixes some
> > tooling issues
Build changes look ok to me.
/Erik
On 2018-09-26 04:26, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get reviews for this JDK 8 backport which fixes some
tooling issues on Linux ppc64le? Prior this patch, a ppc64le build
would report as "ppc64" via os.arch system property which breaks
tooling su
Any more reviewers for this?
Thanks,
Severin
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 08:20 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
> On 26/09/2018 7:52 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Thanks for the review!
> >
> > On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 07:39 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
> > > Hi Severin,
> > >
> > > Changes
On 26/09/2018 7:52 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi David,
Thanks for the review!
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 07:39 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Severin,
Changes present seem okay, but I don't see the SA changes, and don't you
want the JDK test change from this as well:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/
Hi David,
Thanks for the review!
On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 07:39 -0400, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Severin,
>
> Changes present seem okay, but I don't see the SA changes, and don't you
> want the JDK test change from this as well:
>
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/2ff471390a03
>
> ??
Hi Severin,
Changes present seem okay, but I don't see the SA changes, and don't you
want the JDK test change from this as well:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/2ff471390a03
??
Thanks,
David
On 26/09/2018 7:26 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
Hi,
Could I please get reviews for this
Hi,
Could I please get reviews for this JDK 8 backport which fixes some
tooling issues on Linux ppc64le? Prior this patch, a ppc64le build
would report as "ppc64" via os.arch system property which breaks
tooling such as maven in as much as if some dependency needs native
libraries it would downloa
On 12/12/2015 5:05 AM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Volker Simonis
wrote:
I've just verified that your patch still works for linux/ppc64. I've
built and smoke-tested both linux/ppc64 and ppc64le and everything
looks good. So from my side this is ready to push.
Than
Hi Sasha, David,
I've just verified that your patch still works for linux/ppc64. I've
built and smoke-tested both linux/ppc64 and ppc64le and everything
looks good. So from my side this is ready to push.
Thanks for finally getting this ready!
Volker
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 5:47 AM, David Holmes
On 11/12/2015 2:15 PM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
I have jcheck enabled, so I am surprised that the absence of the
Reviewed-by: field was not flagged. Anyways, here's the new set:
Not sure what is going on with your jcheck setup but the formatting is
still wrong:
- the changeset "user" must be
On 10/12/2015 4:16 AM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
I am confused -- is there anything you want me to change in the existing set:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/hotspot/webrev.03
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/jdk/webrev.03
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/roo
I am confused -- is there anything you want me to change in the existing set:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/hotspot/webrev.03
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/jdk/webrev.03
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/root/webrev.03
Sasha
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:10 PM
I can sponsor for you Sasha. Just email me the changeset, or a link thereto.
Thanks,
David
On 9/12/2015 3:44 AM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
Thank you for the review.
If everyone involved is satisfied with the patch, I need a sponsor.
Sasha
On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:46 PM, David Holmes wrote:
O
On 8/12/2015 1:44 PM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
It is achievable by adding a small ppc-specific check to the
common/autoconf/platform.m4:
@@ -282,6 +282,8 @@
elif test "x$OPENJDK_TARGET_OS" != xmacosx && test
"x$OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU" = xx86_64; then
# On all platforms except MacOSX replac
On 5/12/2015 3:55 AM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
I am not convinced that increasing the complexity of the already quite
intricate build
machinery to avoid three additional checks in the source file is the
right trade-off.
Does that mean you looked at how to achieve this?
I think there is a more
On 4/12/2015 4:29 AM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:30 PM, David Holmes wrote:
agent code:
I'm still unclear why you can't, or shouldn't, pass through -Dppc64 and
-Dppc64le, such that you don't need to check for either being defined ??
You mean, add -Dppc64 to the compila
On 1/12/2015 1:31 PM, Alexander Smundak wrote:
On 2015-11-30 05:23, David Holmes wrote:
..
At the top level if we see ppc64le then we set VAR_CPU to ppc64le instead
of ppc64. However, once we get into hotspot build we want ARCH to be ppc64
again (in hotspot-spec.gmk.in) - why is that?
Inside ho
On 2015-12-01 04:31, Alexander Smundak wrote:
On 2015-11-30 05:23, David Holmes wrote:
..
At the top level if we see ppc64le then we set VAR_CPU to ppc64le instead
of ppc64. However, once we get into hotspot build we want ARCH to be ppc64
again (in hotspot-spec.gmk.in) - why is that?
Inside hot
- Original Message -
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> > snip...
> >
> >> The new revision does that:
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/hotspot/webrev.03
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/jdk/webrev.03
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~
snip...
> The new revision does that:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/hotspot/webrev.03
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/jdk/webrev.03
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asmundak/8073139/root/webrev.03/
>
This has grown a lot from my version.
The main change seems to be
On 2015-11-30 05:23, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Sasha,
Trying to trace through this is somewhat complex :)
So ...
At the top level if we see ppc64le then we set VAR_CPU to ppc64le
instead of ppc64. However, once we get into hotspot build we want ARCH
to be ppc64 again (in hotspot-spec.gmk.in)
Hi Sasha,
Trying to trace through this is somewhat complex :)
So ...
At the top level if we see ppc64le then we set VAR_CPU to ppc64le
instead of ppc64. However, once we get into hotspot build we want ARCH
to be ppc64 again (in hotspot-spec.gmk.in) - why is that?
Inside hotpot we want:
SRC
30 matches
Mail list logo
