On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Alexey Varlamov wrote:
Just a wild idea: a smart JIT could hint a GC during allocation if an
object is expected to be short-lived so the GC could allocate it in a
special space,
if a JIT can prove that the object is local, it can allocate it on
stack almost
Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Alexey Varlamov wrote:
Just a wild idea: a smart JIT could hint a GC during allocation if an
object is expected to be short-lived so the GC could allocate it in a
special space,
if a JIT can prove that the object is local, it can
Hi Egor,
An optimization is a functionality that can regress like anything else.
The functionality is the perf gain, which is the point of the optimization.
How would any committer confirm that the submitted code does perform the
optimization ...other than the developer's word that it is
Geir,
AFAIR the only diff to EM files was the fix of the default JIT library path
construction. (?)
Why do you think that the current problem is related to EM?
On 9/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks to Gregory's HARMONY-1459 patch to fix the asm problem, I now
have SVN
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
Geir,
AFAIR the only diff to EM files was the fix of the default JIT library path
construction. (?)
Why do you think that the current problem is related to EM?
I don't anymore. But I get to make stupid mistakes because it's almost
3am here, I've been up since 3am this
Hi, Dear Leo,
There are a couple of known approaches to collect short-lived objects.
The most common approach is generational GC, which is designed
specifically with the assumption that most objects die young in normal
applications. Simply put, the objects are arranged into spaces
according to
well, it wasn't lying.
nm shows it as undefined as well
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
Geir,
AFAIR the only diff to EM files was the fix of the default JIT library
path
construction. (?)
Why do you think that the current problem is related to EM?
I don't anymore.
This is the new method added to
drlvm\trunk\vm\port\src\thread\linux\apr_thread_ext.c
Does your apr_thread_ext.c contains this method?
On 9/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
well, it wasn't lying.
nm shows it as undefined as well
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Mikhail
Hi,Egor:
On 14 Sep 2006 12:30:49 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Leo Li wrote:
Hi,all:
As we all know, java objects are allocated on heap instead of stack,
thus there is a problem about how to garbage collect short-lived objects
quickly.
I'm going to integrate H-1370 that throws exception with some text
but don't know where to put the message.
There is messages.properties in internal package that is empty but consistent
with other modules and there is ExternalMessages.properties that is populated
I'll put it to the old
Hi Rana
2006/9/14, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
SNIP
One way to write the test would be to loop N times on a scenario that
kicks in the optimization say, array bounds check elimination and then loop
N times a very similar scenario but such that the bounds check does not get
eliminated.
On 9/13/06, Tony Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After going through this thread, I realize there is another possibility to
encounter the problem even you are working on single platform,
1.the file you are working on does not have eol-style property and the
latest commit is performed on Unix
+1 to set *svn:eol-style native* to all text files
On 9/14/06, Ilya Okomin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/13/06, Tony Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After going through this thread, I realize there is another possibility
to
encounter the problem even you are working on single platform,
1.the
Thanks for the updated patch!
I still have a question.
As we've discussed [1] available method can be trusted in very special
cases only.
So, should this code
while (is.available() != 0) {
is.read();
}
be replaced with reading until '-1'?
Hello, Mikhail!
I would better suggest you to put new messages to the
messages.propertiesfile as we are going to use common
internationalization scheme for all
modules.
You are right about the converting all messages to the new scheme for [luni]
module one day. However, if all new messages
*Re-sending to the new thread:*
Hello Rana,
When I think of an optimization which gives 1% improvement on some simple
workload or 3% improvement on EM64T platforms only I doubt this can be
easily detected with a general-purpose test suite. IMO the performance
regression testing should have a
Hello Rana,
When I think of an optimization which gives 1% improvement on some simple
workload or 3% improvement on EM64T platforms only I doubt this can be
easily detected with a general-purpose test suite. IMO the performance
regression testing should have a specialized framework and a stable
Thank you!
On 9/14/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Done.
-Original Message-
From: Oleg Khaschansky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:36 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Updated: (HARMONY-1453) [classlib][awt]
It's not clear why it should be non-bug diff?
Shouldn't it be fixed to follow RI?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/9/14, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Would any commiter like to confirm and close this non-bug differences from
RI jira? Thanks!
On 9/13/06, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From:
Leo Li wrote:
Hi,Egor:
On 14 Sep 2006 12:30:49 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Leo Li wrote:
Hi,all:
As we all know, java objects are allocated on heap instead of
stack,
thus there is a problem about how to garbage collect short-lived
Just catching up on harmony mail after a break from the keyboard. I'll
write my apologies once here for picking up on a number of threads late.
Looks like things are steaming along quite nicely.
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.
2006/9/14, Alexei Zakharov (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-953?page=comments#action_12434627 ]
Alexei Zakharov commented on HARMONY-953:
-
IMO it should be moved to DRLVM component.
+1
Thanks,
Mikhail
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Oliver Deakin wrote:
Forcing gc by hand does work, but it is difficult for code to know
when to
call gc.So I think it is better if VM can give some support since it
knows
the global situation.:)
..and of course a manual gc() call does not necessarily
Hi, Leo, your concerns about the potential impact of GC on system
performance (time and memory) are quite reasonable. Yes, there is no
single GC algorithm that wins all situations. Some dynamic adaptation
are desirable.
We would like to introduce this kind of dynamics step by step, since
it's
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is performed
by this constructor.
2. The exception thrown sequence is really hard to follow, as described by
Ilya, see examples below:
1. new URL(ss, 0, -3, null);
java.net.MalformedURLException: Invalid port
OK, let's look what that code does.
1) First, it unconditionally skips Thread.runImpl stack frame. This is
a wrapper for Thread.run method to handle uncaught exceptions
properly. With the former DRLVM launcher we always had Thread.runImpl
method on the stack. Since this is artificial frame added
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Oliver and Co :
I don't know if you caught this in another thread, but I recently
changed the launcher to pass the -showversion cmd line param through
to the VM after the launcher prints out its version, so that we can also
know the version of the VM.
The
I don't think the fix is complete. The patch only fixed reported bug, but
introduces new severe bugs.
Because fd would never be initialized after applying the patch. Running all
tests would also fail with crash.
After deleting initialization code in SocketImpl.java, we have to initialize
Welcome back!
On 9/14/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just catching up on harmony mail after a break from the keyboard. I'll
write my apologies once here for picking up on a number of threads late.
Looks like things are steaming along quite nicely.
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is
performed
by this constructor.
In this spec. quotation above there is one thing that confuses me - THIS
CONSTRUCTOR. May this mean that validation of inputs is perform,
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is
performed
by this constructor.
In this spec. quotation above there is one thing that confuses me - THIS
CONSTRUCTOR. May
Ilya Okomin wrote:
Hello, Nathan!
Thank you for taking a deep look at the i18n task!!
I try to comment inline...
On 9/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any reason that there are three overloaded getString(String,
XXX)
methods that take variations of Object?
Andrew Zhang wrote:
I don't think the fix is complete. The patch only fixed reported bug, but
introduces new severe bugs.
Because fd would never be initialized after applying the patch. Running all
tests would also fail with crash.
Yes, fd without initialized may cause a tragedy, all network
Our VM interface documentation[1] is drifting out of sync with code
changes. If anyone has time to refresh it, with help from the dev list,
that would be a very valuable task. We should ensure that VM writers
understand how to get the harmony class library code working with their VM.
[1]
Thanks Alexey - I think these guidelines will be helpful for all of
us, whether opening, fixing or committing bugs and patches.
Just a couple of extra comments.
Alexey Petrenko wrote:
Guys,
I think that we need to create something like Good issue resolution
guideline and post it on Harmony
On 9/14/06, Jimmy, Jing Lv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting topic, I'm still dreaming of free() in Java (This dream
begins at the very beginning when I see Java, as C/C++ is my first
program language )However, it seems RI will never give us free(). :)
Only a thought, Java may offer a key
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is
performed
by this constructor.
In this spec. quotation above there is one thing that confuses
Ok, the second reason is convincing
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/9/14, Andrew Zhang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is performed
by this constructor.
2. The exception thrown sequence is really hard to follow, as described by
Hi all,
JAPI tool shows a number of inconsistencies in the java.awt and
java.awt.* packages [1]. I am going to provide a patch(es) for this
packages except java.awt.print if noone objects. This will include
implementing of unimplemented methods, generification and marking some
fields/methods as
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
When I think of an optimization which gives 1% improvement on some simple
workload or 3% improvement on EM64T platforms only I doubt this can be
easily detected with a general-purpose test suite. IMO the performance
regression testing
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is
performed
by this constructor.
In
Yes, it looks like fd field should be initialized by subclass.
Andrew, are you going to suggest a new patch?
SY, Alexey
2006/9/14, Jimmy, Jing Lv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
I don't think the fix is complete. The patch only fixed reported bug, but
introduces new severe bugs.
Alexey,
It is still alive and very active. :) But I'd rather wait until 1363 applied
before making any moves in that direction.
Regards,
Pavel.
On 9/14/06, Alexey Varlamov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pavel,
What happened with your initial plan (cited below)? I suggest you
proceed with it, I
2006/9/13, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Not sure C++ friends are good design.
Umm, what is wrong with friends?
It's sort of breaking incapsulation ideology. Nothing more. :)
SNIP
For example, private members of Method _parse_exceptions()
_parse_local_vars(), _parse_line_numbers(),
2006/9/13, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Guys,
I think that we need to create something like Good issue resolution
guideline and post it on Harmony site or wiki. It will help community
to prepare good fixes and will help committers to spend less time on
applying other's patches.
As a
Actually, the code should be fixed rather than commented out in the
following way:
//--size;
// skip the VMStart$MainThread.runImpl() if it exists from the bottom
// of the stack along with 2 reflection frames used to invoke method
main
static String* starter_String =
Alexey Varlamov wrote:
2006/9/13, Alexey Varlamov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
snip
Hmm, I'm not sure I understand how the Harmony launcher could be
helpful to an adaptive VM, until the VM can detect by which launcher
it is invoked and adapt accordingly. But the latter is evidently
unnecessary
Can anyone of commiters close this issue please. It looks like already fixed.
Thanks in advance.
SY, Alexey
2006/9/14, Alexey Petrenko (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-1392?page=comments#action_12434657
]
Alexey Petrenko commented on HARMONY-1392:
Oops, I haven't waited for Evgueni's message. The fix suggested in
HARMONY-1431 does not imply the launcher implementation...
Thanks,
Elena
On 9/14/06, Elena Semukhina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, the code should be fixed rather than commented out in the
following way:
//--size;
Ha-ha that code was buggy anyway :-) As I've already said we do need
filter Thread.runImpl frames for java threads created by calling
Thread.start method. Elena, you've fixed that code once, probably, you
wish to fix it once again? :-)
Thank you
Evgueni
On 9/14/06, Elena Semukhina [EMAIL
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are two reasons:
1. Spec has explicitly pointed out No validation of the inputs is
performed
by
In the example i've mentioned before the difference between optimized and
non-optimized calls was about 1000x. But the test sometimes failed anyway
Thanks,
Mikhail
14 Sep 2006 17:59:44 +0700, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
When I think
I have not said that it validaites. I said that it can :)
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Stepan Mishura :
On 9/14/06, Andrew Zhang wrote:
There are
Hi,
When we created 'suncompat' module we were not going to put any tests there
(at least we didn't talk about them). But I think it might make sense to
have compatibility tests for 'suncompat' module.
For example, if there is a bug in Base64 class. When the bug is fixed a
regression test is
I'll fix it with great pleasure!
BTW, I managed to run Eclipse 3.2 even with that buggy code. But running
java -jar fails.
Elena
On 9/14/06, Evgueni Brevnov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ha-ha that code was buggy anyway :-) As I've already said we do need
filter Thread.runImpl frames for java
At present, the Harmony launcher creates and passes an instance of the
portlib to the VM as it is being created (via an
_org.apache.harmony.vmi.portlib init arg). This is good because allows
the launcher to define functions used for memory alloc, file IO, etc. early.
However, we also need to
Sorry for picking on Harmony-1417. It happened to be what I was looking at
when I wrote the email. The issue is more general than JIT optimizations.
I realize it will be impossible to supply rigorous tests for BBC.patch and
14xx.patches in the next few days.
However, would it be possible for
On 14 September 2006 at 14:57, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
JAPI tool shows a number of inconsistencies in the java.awt and
java.awt.* packages [1]. I am going to provide a patch(es) for this
packages except java.awt.print if noone objects. This will include
On 9/13/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jimmy, Jing Lv [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:07 AM
IIRC, there's a open JIRA of management, it is because Harmony
java.lang.management does not exist yet, please ignore.
Elena Semukhina wrote:
I'll fix it with great pleasure!
BTW, I managed to run Eclipse 3.2 even with that buggy code. But running
java -jar fails.
Apologies if this has already been mentioned, I'm still catching up with
unread mail...
If you are using the harmony launcher then it will be
I'd suggest two further things.
First, we change the default JIRA priority to something lower than
'Major'. Currently most come in as 'Major' even if they are trivial
edge cases that might never affect an application. I assume because
people are just leaving the default unchanged without
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Nice work all. You guys are amazing. Definitely create that patch and
attach to the initial JIRA.
yep -- cool to see that get worked on by a number of people in the
community. A tricky bug too, so good teamwork!
Regards,
Tim
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Richard Liang
of course :)
Mikhail Fursov wrote:
This is the new method added to
drlvm\trunk\vm\port\src\thread\linux\apr_thread_ext.c
Does your apr_thread_ext.c contains this method?
On 9/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
well, it wasn't lying.
nm shows it as undefined as well
geir
I thought we did this a while ago...?
geir
Tony Wu wrote:
+1 to set *svn:eol-style native* to all text files
On 9/14/06, Ilya Okomin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/13/06, Tony Wu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After going through this thread, I realize there is another possibility
to
encounter
Or have DRLVM component added. I thought one of the problems is that we
don't actually know how to deterministically fix as it's not specified
in the spec.
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Alexei Zakharov (JIRA) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[
Oleg,
I've checked in the changes I had outstanding as r443340. Patches for
the other issues would be very welcome.
Regards,
-Mark.
On 14 September 2006 at 13:37, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 14 September 2006 at 14:57, Oleg Khaschansky [EMAIL PROTECTED]
om wrote:
Hi all,
Agree on both cases.
We can also ask to use dos2unix utility on Windows to convert patches
to unix LF fromat.
SY, Alexey
2006/9/14, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'd suggest two further things.
First, we change the default JIRA priority to something lower than
'Major'. Currently most come
Seems some modules were missed. Take a look at the [security] or [prefs]
modules (probably another also, I didn't check all modules) source .java
files there still haven't required svn property.
Thanks,
Ilya.
On 9/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought we did this a
Elena Semukhina wrote:
Oops, I haven't waited for Evgueni's message. The fix suggested in
HARMONY-1431 does not imply the launcher implementation...
We want launcher.
geir
Thanks,
Elena
On 9/14/06, Elena Semukhina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, the code should be fixed rather
Tim Ellison wrote:
Elena Semukhina wrote:
I'll fix it with great pleasure!
BTW, I managed to run Eclipse 3.2 even with that buggy code. But running
java -jar fails.
Apologies if this has already been mentioned, I'm still catching up with
unread mail...
If you are using the harmony
Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
Leo Li wrote:
Hi,all:
As we all know, java objects are allocated on heap instead of stack,
thus there is a problem about how to garbage collect short-lived objects
quickly.
In a recent real project I involved, a server built on java tries to
send thousands of
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Oliver and Co :
I don't know if you caught this in another thread, but I recently
changed the launcher to pass the -showversion cmd line param through
to the VM after the launcher prints out its version, so that we can also
know the version of the
welcome back!
Tim Ellison wrote:
Just catching up on harmony mail after a break from the keyboard. I'll
write my apologies once here for picking up on a number of threads late.
Looks like things are steaming along quite nicely.
Tim
true, but there's no reason why this couldn't be in the code too...
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
Our VM interface documentation[1] is drifting out of sync with code
changes. If anyone has time to refresh it, with help from the dev list,
that would be a very valuable task. We should ensure that VM
On 14 September 2006 at 17:13, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agree on both cases.
We can also ask to use dos2unix utility on Windows to convert patches
to unix LF fromat.
I'm actually less worried about this one. I tend to be able to get any
patch to work under linux using either
There are two options supported by Support_Exec: IBM and Sun
I'd like to apply this change (remove IBM branch and leave the Sun branch for
all VMs):
Index: C:/WS/Experiments/support/src/test/java/tests/support/Support_Exec.java
This would be the best solution to test if an optimization works as
expected.
We can create the following framework inside Jitrino compiler to test
individual optimizations and optimizations inter-dependencies:
Create a special optimization (test) that that works only for special
Java method
Mark, thank you for the good news! I'll do the generification and
missing stuff then. I plan to make one patch for all the
generification and, probably, several other patches for the missing
methods/fields.
On 9/14/06, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oleg,
I've checked in the changes I
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Oliver and Co :
I don't know if you caught this in another thread, but I recently
changed the launcher to pass the -showversion cmd line param through
to the VM after the launcher prints out its version, so that we can also
know the version of
As I got it, the referenced documentation is created from code already,
so I don't quite get Geir's comment ;(
Anyway, I agree that keeping docs up-to-date is important. Do you think
we can ask the community to update comments with the code changes? This
way, the docs will never be out-of-sync.
Does this mean we could no longer use the IBM VME to run the tests?
Regards,
Oliver
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
There are two options supported by Support_Exec: IBM and Sun
I'd like to apply this change (remove IBM branch and leave the Sun
branch for
all VMs):
Index:
2006/9/14, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2006/9/13, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Not sure C++ friends are good design.
Umm, what is wrong with friends?
It's sort of breaking incapsulation ideology. Nothing more. :)
SNIP
For example, private members of Method _parse_exceptions()
Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
As I got it, the referenced documentation is created from code already,
so I don't quite get Geir's comment ;(
Because some docs don't come from code. I'd prefer that for code-like
things (like expectations we have for implementers of kernel classes)
that at
yep -- that's what I meant. The on-line doc should be generated from
the code comments as it is today.
Regards,
Tim
Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
As I got it, the referenced documentation is created from code already,
so I don't quite get Geir's comment ;(
Anyway, I agree that keeping docs
I don't understand either.
(And we'd certainly want to always be able to choose J9 or whatever else
shows up too...)
geir
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Does this mean we could no longer use the IBM VME to run the tests?
Regards,
Oliver
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
There are two options supported by
On 9/14/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it is not so easy to support free() in JVM as it looks like,
and may not really bring benefit. Even worse, it may introduce unsafe
code, which was one of the major design goals of Java/JVM. That said,
Typo here: which was ... -- well
For example, private members of Method _parse_exceptions()
_parse_local_vars(), _parse_line_numbers(), _parse_code() actually
should be public members of respective entities.
They should not. Nobody but Method knows nothing about local variable
tables
and line numbers stored in it. It
So - no matter what happens w/ the docs, we do need this in the code...
geir
Tim Ellison wrote:
yep -- that's what I meant. The on-line doc should be generated from
the code comments as it is today.
Regards,
Tim
Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
As I got it, the referenced documentation is
2006/9/14, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't understand either.
Neither do I :)
It's not clear for me why different command lines are generated for Sun and IBM,
given that the tests pass on IBM if Sun's command line is passed there
What I suggest is to start all VMs with the same
On the 0x1E4 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote:
In the example i've mentioned before the difference between optimized and
non-optimized calls was about 1000x. But the test sometimes failed anyway
Yet, I think, pure Java performance is more predictable than network
performance. I am
Ah - yes - lets not call it sun then if it's universal.
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/9/14, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I don't understand either.
Neither do I :)
It's not clear for me why different command lines are generated for Sun
and IBM,
given that the tests pass on IBM if
2006/9/14, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Oliver Deakin wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
Oliver and Co :
I don't know if you caught this in another thread, but I recently
changed the launcher to pass the -showversion cmd line param through
to the VM after the
Pavel, Alexey,
I agree on holding off cleanup of class loader until Pavel's proposal is
committed to trunk.
Pavel,
It would be great if you can open a JIRA with rough sample header files as
soon as you are comfortable. I anticipate lots of conversation on this.
The intention is to stay away
On 9/14/06, Jimmy, Jing Lv [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Zhang wrote:
I don't think the fix is complete. The patch only fixed reported bug,
but
introduces new severe bugs.
Because fd would never be initialized after applying the patch. Running
all
tests would also fail with crash.
Yes,
On 9/14/06, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem is not parsing code itself, you know - just when someone
does a trivial fix in LocalVarTable parsing procedure, I have to
recompile the whole VM + GC (and maybe even JIT)! Where are you, vm
modularity ;)
No, you don't. If someone
No
sorry for unclear wording, the tests passed on IBM VME
2006/9/14, Oliver Deakin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Does this mean we could no longer use the IBM VME to run the tests?
Regards,
Oliver
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
There are two options supported by Support_Exec: IBM and Sun
I'd like to apply
So I'm not making much progress.
nm reports that apr_get_thread_time is undefined for libharmonyvm.so
although for libhythr.so it's there.It's also in libport.a, where it
comes from for both. So I'm confident that all is well re the source
for the function, it's inclusion in the right .a
Great News! And maybe you'll be busy, because many discussions here need
your participation. :)
On 9/14/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just catching up on harmony mail after a break from the keyboard. I'll
write my apologies once here for picking up on a number of threads late.
Thanks for listening, I took a SWAG and got it...
It needed to have a libset entry for port at the end of the libsets.
Grumble.
Anyway, I can now do a ./java -version successfully w/ 1363 applied.
Will do some basic tests and then commit
geir
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
So I'm not making
SNIP
The inclusion of external header files in GC is a continual battle. From
a
modularity standpoint, the external header files need to be excluded.
During GC debug its often useful to access class name, subclass name, etc.
What really needs to happen is class.h accessors need to be
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
