Re: RFR: 8301991: Convert l10n properties resource bundles to UTF-8 native [v5]

2023-03-31 Thread Naoto Sato
On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 22:27:48 GMT, Justin Lu wrote: >> This PR converts Unicode sequences to UTF-8 native in .properties file. >> (Excluding the Unicode space and tab sequence). The conversion was done >> using native2ascii. >> >> In addition, the build logic is adjusted to support reading in

Re: RFR: 8304295: harfbuzz build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998 [v2]

2023-03-31 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 21:27:08 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote: >> Builds successfully with GCC 7 >> >> >> gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) >> Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO >> warranty; not even

Re: RFR: 8304295: harfbuzz build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998 [v2]

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 21:27:08 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote: >> Builds successfully with GCC 7 >> >> >> gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) >> Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO >> warranty; not even

Re: RFR: 8301991: Convert l10n properties resource bundles to UTF-8 native [v5]

2023-03-31 Thread Justin Lu
On Fri, 17 Mar 2023 22:27:48 GMT, Justin Lu wrote: >> This PR converts Unicode sequences to UTF-8 native in .properties file. >> (Excluding the Unicode space and tab sequence). The conversion was done >> using native2ascii. >> >> In addition, the build logic is adjusted to support reading in

Re: RFR: 8304295: harfbuzz build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998

2023-03-31 Thread Joshua Cao
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 13:00:08 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> Builds successfully with GCC 7 >> >> >> gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) >> Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO >> warranty; not even

Re: RFR: 8304295: harfbuzz build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998 [v2]

2023-03-31 Thread Joshua Cao
> Builds successfully with GCC 7 > > > gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) > Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO > warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Re: RFR: 8303229: JFR: Preserve disk repository after exit [v8]

2023-03-31 Thread Markus Grönlund
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 18:56:20 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Could I have a review of an enhancement that adds the option >> preserve-repository=true/false to -XX:FlightRecorderOptions and jcmd >> JFR.configure. When set to true, chunk files in the repository will not be >> removed by

Re: RFR: 8303229: JFR: Preserve disk repository after exit [v8]

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Gahlin
> Hi, > > Could I have a review of an enhancement that adds the option > preserve-repository=true/false to -XX:FlightRecorderOptions and jcmd > JFR.configure. When set to true, chunk files in the repository will not be > removed by the JVM at exit. > > Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr > > Thanks > Erik

Re: RFR: 8304295: VM build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998

2023-03-31 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 13:00:08 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: > That said, it may be worth adding a comment that this warning has only been > observed with GCC 7. That will help in the future when someone tries to > remove disabled warnings. Then the comment is better than nothing. -

Re: RFR: 8303229: JFR: Preserve disk repository after exit [v7]

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Gahlin
> Hi, > > Could I have a review of an enhancement that adds the option > preserve-repository=true/false to -XX:FlightRecorderOptions and jcmd > JFR.configure. When set to true, chunk files in the repository will not be > removed by the JVM at exit. > > Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr > > Thanks > Erik

Re: RFR: 8303229: JFR: Preserve disk repository after exit [v6]

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Gahlin
> Hi, > > Could I have a review of an enhancement that adds the option > preserve-repository=true/false to -XX:FlightRecorderOptions and jcmd > JFR.configure. When set to true, chunk files in the repository will not be > removed by the JVM at exit. > > Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr > > Thanks > Erik

Re: How current does the build jdk have to be for cross builds

2023-03-31 Thread Thomas Stüfe
Thank you Erik! I expected that. I guess I better rebuild it for every bisect I do. Cheers, Thomas On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 3:21 PM wrote: > Hello Thomas, > > On 3/31/23 05:43, Thomas Stüfe wrote: > > Hi, > > > > quick question, I'm doing arm crossbuilds, trying to find an errornous > >

Re: How current does the build jdk have to be for cross builds

2023-03-31 Thread erik . joelsson
Hello Thomas, On 3/31/23 05:43, Thomas Stüfe wrote: Hi, quick question, I'm doing arm crossbuilds, trying to find an errornous patch with bisecting. With crossbuild, I am specifying build-jdk. How current does the build-jdk have to be? If the build jdk does not fit the source I am trying

Re: RFR: 8304295: VM build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 21:05:40 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote: > Builds successfully with GCC 7 > > > gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) > Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO > warranty; not even for

Re: RFR: 8304893: Link Time Optimization with gcc can be faster [v3]

2023-03-31 Thread Thomas Stuefe
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 23:38:12 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> A previous argument against link time optimization support that we have for >> gcc is that it was extremely slow. After some checks it turns out we are >> passing rather inefficient flags to gcc in optimized builds. Changing these >>

Re: RFR: 8304893: Link Time Optimization with gcc can be faster [v3]

2023-03-31 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 23:38:12 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> A previous argument against link time optimization support that we have for >> gcc is that it was extremely slow. After some checks it turns out we are >> passing rather inefficient flags to gcc in optimized builds. Changing these >>

How current does the build jdk have to be for cross builds

2023-03-31 Thread Thomas Stüfe
Hi, quick question, I'm doing arm crossbuilds, trying to find an errornous patch with bisecting. With crossbuild, I am specifying build-jdk. How current does the build-jdk have to be? If the build jdk does not fit the source I am trying to build, would that be immediately obvious or would I get

Re: RFR: 8304265: Implementation of Foreign Function and Memory API (Third Preview) [v16]

2023-03-31 Thread Maurizio Cimadamore
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 11:28:25 GMT, Per Minborg wrote: >> API changes for the FFM API (third preview) >> >> Specdiff: >> https://cr.openjdk.org/~pminborg/panama/21/v1/specdiff/overview-summary.html >> >> Javadoc: >>

Re: RFR: 8304295: VM build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998

2023-03-31 Thread Aleksey Shipilev
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 21:11:25 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote: >> Builds successfully with GCC 7 >> >> >> gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) >> Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. >> This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO >> warranty; not even

Re: RFR: 8304295: VM build fails with GCC 7 after JDK-8301998

2023-03-31 Thread Aleksey Shipilev
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 21:05:40 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote: > Builds successfully with GCC 7 > > > gcc (GCC) 7.3.1 20180712 (Red Hat 7.3.1-15) > Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO > warranty; not even for

Integrated: 8305174: disable dtrace for s390x builds

2023-03-31 Thread Amit Kumar
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 13:04:39 GMT, Amit Kumar wrote: > As stated in JBS-issue, `dtrace` functionality is not available on s390x. So > disabling it explicitly in the build. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 7fe5bd2b Author:Amit Kumar Committer: Matthias Baesken URL:

Re: RFR: 8305089: Implement missing socket options on AIX [v2]

2023-03-31 Thread Varada M
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:05:08 GMT, Varada M wrote: >> Breaking this into two parts : >> >> 1. Implementing socket options for AIX >> 2. DontFragmentTest failure >> >> - Implementing socket options for AIX : >> >> Unlike the linux, windows and macOS, AIX uses the default implementation for

Re: RFR: 8305089: Implement missing socket options on AIX [v2]

2023-03-31 Thread Varada M
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 01:19:05 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote: >> `newInstance("jdk.net.AIXSocketOptions")` will try to invoke the default >> constructor `AIXSocketOptions() {}`. When we make it as private constructor >> PlatformSocketOptions instance will try to find jdk.net.AIXSocketOptions and >>

Re: RFR: 8305174: disable dtrace for s390x builds

2023-03-31 Thread Matthias Baesken
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 07:25:21 GMT, Amit Kumar wrote: > Hi all, it appears that checks were already succeeded, but this is not > reflected here. Can we do anything? If you are refering to the still running macos-x64 tests, I think they are unrelated and those test runs have some issue. I would

Re: RFR: 8305174: disable dtrace for s390x builds

2023-03-31 Thread Amit Kumar
On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 13:04:39 GMT, Amit Kumar wrote: > As stated in JBS-issue, `dtrace` functionality is not available on s390x. So > disabling it explicitly in the build. Hi all, it appears that checks were already succeeded, but this is not reflected here. Can we do anything? -

Re: RFR: 8304893: Link Time Optimization with gcc can be faster [v3]

2023-03-31 Thread David Holmes
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 23:38:12 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> A previous argument against link time optimization support that we have for >> gcc is that it was extremely slow. After some checks it turns out we are >> passing rather inefficient flags to gcc in optimized builds. Changing these >>