Re: RFR: 8329816: Add SLEEF version 3.6.1 [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Hamlin Li
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 19:36:28 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > 3]. scripts to transfering from 1] to 2], and necessary documents, e.g. > > record which tag of sleef to use, . > > In addition to the tag, we should include the full git hash as well. A tag > can be moved, but it's very hard to fake a

Re: RFR: 8329816: Add SLEEF version 3.6.1 [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:36:41 GMT, Hamlin Li wrote: > 3]. scripts to transfering from 1] to 2], and necessary documents, e.g. > record which tag of sleef to use, . In addition to the tag, we should include the full git hash as well. A tag can be moved, but it's very hard to fake a new git hash

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v6]

2024-08-28 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:17:52 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big >> sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of >> the build. >> >> We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -

Re: RFR: 8338768: Introduce runtime lookup to check for static builds [v2]

2024-08-28 Thread Jiangli Zhou
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 23:15:03 GMT, Jiangli Zhou wrote: >> And the discussion whether the checks are made "dynamically" or "statically" >> is too simplified to be really helpful. >> >> Currently, we compile two sets of all object files, with slightly different >> compiler arguments, one for dyna

Re: RFR: 8329816: Add SLEEF version 3.6.1 [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Hamlin Li
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 22:03:37 GMT, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: >> [JDK-8312425](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8312425) is looking to >> optimize vector math operations by leveraging the SLEEF library. For legal >> reasons the actual contribution of the SLEEF files needs to be handled >> separa

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v6]

2024-08-28 Thread Julian Waters
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:17:52 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big >> sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of >> the build. >> >> We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v6]

2024-08-28 Thread Kim Barrett
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 15:15:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big >> sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of >> the build. >> >> We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v6]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big > sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of > the build. > > We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -Wall) and use a much > more fine-grained approach to disabling spe

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:35:19 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote: >> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Fix aarch54 > > make/modules/java.desktop/lib/ClientLibraries.gmk line 284: > >> 282: >> 283: ifeq ($(USE_EXTERN

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v5]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 12:29:36 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Good point, I'll try that. > > It turned out to be sort-of okay-ish. I explicitly listed like 6 or so > per-file exclusions in Hotspot (even though my normal cutoff for just setting > a component-wide exclude is 3-4) since it seems

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v5]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big > sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of > the build. > > We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -Wall) and use a much > more fine-grained approach to disabling spe

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v4]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big > sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of > the build. > > We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -Wall) and use a much > more fine-grained approach to disabling spe

Re: RFR: 8338768: Introduce runtime lookup to check for static builds [v2]

2024-08-28 Thread Erik Joelsson
On Mon, 26 Aug 2024 02:07:39 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > I understand the cost overhead experienced by any individual Java run may be > lost in the noise, but it still impacts every single Java run just to save > some time/resources for the handful of builders of statically linked VMs. I > am n

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Kim Barrett
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:02:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big >> sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of >> the build. >> >> We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big > sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of > the build. > > We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -Wall) and use a much > more fine-grained approach to disabling spe

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v2]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> Currently, we issue -Wno-unused for all files in gcc, which is a rather big > sledgehammer to get rid of some warnings that proliferate in a few areas of > the build. > > We should instead leave -Wunused turned on (as done by -Wall) and use a much > more fine-grained approach to disabling spe

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings [v2]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 11:26:01 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> make/autoconf/flags-cflags.m4 line 239: >> >>> 237: # Additional warnings that are not activated by -Wall and -Wextra >>> 238: WARNINGS_ENABLE_ADDITIONAL="-Wpointer-arith -Wreturn-type >>> -Wsign-compare \ >>> 239:

Re: RFR: 8329816: Add SLEEF version 3.6.1 [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 22:03:37 GMT, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: >> [JDK-8312425](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8312425) is looking to >> optimize vector math operations by leveraging the SLEEF library. For legal >> reasons the actual contribution of the SLEEF files needs to be handled >> separa

Re: RFR: 8339120: Use more fine-granular gcc unused warnings

2024-08-28 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 06:38:48 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote: > We should make a similar set of changes for clang, though doing that in a > separate proposal is good. Is there a JBS issue for that yet? Yes, we should. I am 80% done with that patch, but I have not yet opened a JBS ticket. Will do that n

Re: RFR: 8329816: Add SLEEF version 3.6.1 [v3]

2024-08-28 Thread Hamlin Li
On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 22:37:01 GMT, Mikael Vidstedt wrote: >> @vidmik Thanks for pushing forward this work. >> Sure, I can take the work. >> >> Just several questions, Sorry, as this is the first time I do this kind of >> work in jdk. >> In this pr, we already have the pre-generated sleef files a