Re: RFR: 8144220: UL does not support full path names for log files on windows

Hi Bengt, Thanks for looking at this. On 2015-12-02 14:59, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Marcus, On 2015-12-02 14:41, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following patch to allow full path names for log files on windows. The full path to files will on windows contain a colon (from

RFR: 8144220: UL does not support full path names for log files on windows

Hi, Please review the following patch to allow full path names for log files on windows. The full path to files will on windows contain a colon (from the C:\ part), and there used to be no way to avoid that colon from being parsed as the delimiter for the next -Xlog: option. With this patch

Re: RFR: 8142952: Unified Logging framework does not allow multiple -Xlog: arguments

arcus Thanks, David On 27/11/2015 1:17 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, New webrev after offline review with Bengt and Staffan: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8142952/webrev.01/ Incremental: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8142952/webrev.00-01/ Changes: * LogLevel::Unchanged was chan

Re: RFR: 8142952: Unified Logging framework does not allow multiple -Xlog: arguments

Thanks for reviewing, Staffan! Marcus On 2015-11-26 16:54, Staffan Larsen wrote: Looks good! Thanks, /Staffan On 26 nov. 2015, at 16:17, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, New webrev after offline review with Bengt and Staffan: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8142952/webrev.01/ Incremental

Re: RFR: 8142952: Unified Logging framework does not allow multiple -Xlog: arguments

Thanks for reviewing, Bengt! Marcus On 2015-11-26 16:25, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Marcus, On 2015-11-26 16:17, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, New webrev after offline review with Bengt and Staffan: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8142952/webrev.01/ Incremental: http://cr.openjdk.java.net

Re: RFR: 8142952: Unified Logging framework does not allow multiple -Xlog: arguments

at FormatBuffers for the string handling in LogOutput, but unfortunately they are sized according to template parameters and hence don't play well with the dynamic expansion required here. Thanks Marcus On 2015-11-24 11:46, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following patch to e

Re: RFR: 8142979: Add programmatic enable/disable methods to Unified Logging

On 2015-11-25 14:17, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Marcus, On 2015-11-25 13:13, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following patch adding support for configuration of the stdout unified logging output from within the VM itself. The patch adds the configure_stdout() function, allowing

RFR: 8142979: Add programmatic enable/disable methods to Unified Logging

Hi, Please review the following patch adding support for configuration of the stdout unified logging output from within the VM itself. The patch adds the configure_stdout() function, allowing a set of tags to be set to the given level on stdout. To disable logging the level is simply specifi

RFR: 8142952: Unified Logging framework does not allow multiple -Xlog: arguments

Hi, Please review the following patch to enable multiple -Xlog arguments to aggregate the log configuration. Summary: Tag sets that are unaffected by a -Xlog argument will now be left untouched, enabling them to keep settings from a previous -Xlog argument. To be able to print the current l

Re: RFR: 8143229: Replace the develop level with develop macros in Unified Logging

irst-class" piece of information in a develop build. Otherwise seems okay - though I'm still trying to come to grips with UL as a whole. :) Thanks, David thanks, Coleen On 11/20/15 6:58 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following patch to replace the previous '

RFR: 8143229: Replace the develop level with develop macros in Unified Logging

Hi, Please review the following patch to replace the previous 'develop' level with macros, in the unified logging framework. The macros are essentially regular log calls inside a #ifndef PRODUCT. In the product they do nothing / return false. This allows the regular log levels to be used for d

[PING] Re: RFR (XS): 8142483: Unified logging log instances cause warnings on windows when only static functions are used

Need another review for this! Thanks, Marcus On 2015-11-13 10:20, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following small patch to avoid 'unused variable' warnings on windows when only static functions are used on a log instance. Using log instances like this saves us from

Re: RFR: 8143229: Replace the develop level with develop macros in Unified Logging

Thank you for reviewing, Bengt! Marcus On 2015-11-20 13:09, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Marcus, On 2015-11-20 12:58, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following patch to replace the previous 'develop' level with macros, in the unified logging framework. The macros are e

Re: RFR: 8143157: Convert TraceVMOperation to Unified Logging

Hi, On 2015-11-18 23:06, David Holmes wrote: Hi Rachel, On 19/11/2015 4:41 AM, Rachel Protacio wrote: Hi, On 11/18/2015 12:32 PM, Max Ockner wrote: I think the issue is that doit() happens regardless of what is being logged. I don't think we can reorder the logging statements relative to doi

RFR (XS): 8142483: Unified logging log instances cause warnings on windows when only static functions are used

Hi, Please review the following small patch to avoid 'unused variable' warnings on windows when only static functions are used on a log instance. Using log instances like this saves us from specifying the log tags for every function call, so it is something we should not warn about. The patc

Re: RFR (S): 8142482: Improve the support for prefix functions in unified logging

Thanks for reviewing! Marcus On 2015-11-13 09:20, Per Liden wrote: Hi Marcus, On 2015-11-11 15:19, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following small patch to improve the support for prefixes in unified logging. Instead of the previous format and value/callback, a prefix is now

Re: RFR (S): 8142482: Improve the support for prefix functions in unified logging

Thanks for reviewing! Marcus On 2015-11-11 17:34, Bengt Rutisson wrote: Hi Marcus. On 2015-11-11 15:19, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Please review the following small patch to improve the support for prefixes in unified logging. Instead of the previous format and value/callback, a prefix

Re: RFR: 8142366: Add develop_debug and develop_trace levels to Unified Logging

Hi, I don't think this is the right approach for this problem. These new develop levels are introduced as even finer levels than the trace, but have names that somewhat say otherwise. For example, develop_info is finer than trace, but it isn't unreasonable to expect that develop_info actually

RFR (S): 8142482: Improve the support for prefix functions in unified logging

Hi, Please review the following small patch to improve the support for prefixes in unified logging. Instead of the previous format and value/callback, a prefix is now defined as a function that receives the log buffer as argument, allowing it to fill in an arbitrary (or empty!) prefix. (This

Re: RFR: JDK-8140556: Add force rotation option to VM.log jcmd

be added to LogConfiguration::_outputs and to LogTagSet after calling LogFileOutput::initialize(). I wonder why we cannot avoid crash/assert with current implementation... I will keep current implementation about _rotation_lock if the above is incorrect. Thanks, Yasumasa On 2015/10/31 0:31, Marcus

Re: RFR: 8138916: Logging write function does not allow for long enough messages

Looks good! Regards, Marcus On 2015-11-04 20:49, Rachel Protacio wrote: Updated webrev with this fgets change: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rprotacio/8139564.04/ Passes JPRT tests. Thank you, Rachel On 11/4/2015 4:59 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hmm, I just noticed that the test doesn't

Re: RFR: 8138916: Logging write function does not allow for long enough messages

Hmm, I just noticed that the test doesn't null terminate the string it reads from file. Replacing the fgetc loop with a call to fgets should fix this. Regards, Marcus On 2015-11-04 10:49, Marcus Larsson wrote: Looks good, thank you for fixing this! Regards, Marcus On 2015-11-02

Re: RFR: 8138916: Logging write function does not allow for long enough messages

ks for it there. Using "logging" tag in the "develop" level. Testing succeeds. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rprotacio/8139564.03/ Thank you, Rachel On 10/29/2015 6:35 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, On 2015-10-28 21:59, Rachel Protacio wrote: Including serviceabili

Re: RFR: JDK-8140556: Add force rotation option to VM.log jcmd

y comment above for what crash/assert I'm talking about. Thanks, Marcus Thanks, Yasumasa On 2015/10/29 23:58, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, On 2015-10-29 15:01, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: Hi Marcus, Thank you for your comment. I'll sponsor it. Thank you so much! I've upl

Re: RFR: JDK-8140556: Add force rotation option to VM.log jcmd

s can be triggered using the following arguments "-Xlog:all=trace:file.txt::filesize=10,filecount=2 -Xlog:invalid", for example.) Thanks, Marcus Thanks, Yasumasa On 2015/10/27 21:17, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, On 2015-10-27 01:03, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: Hi Marcus, Thank you for re

Re: RFR: 8138916: Logging write function does not allow for long enough messages

Hi, On 2015-10-28 21:59, Rachel Protacio wrote: Including serviceability-dev. Recap: Summary: In logging/log.hpp, the logging vwrite function previously asserted that the buffer remains within 512 characters, which is too short for logging message of non-pre-determined length, e.g. for vtable

Re: RFR: JDK-8140556: Add force rotation option to VM.log jcmd

ate() function public and moving the mutexlocker, I suggest adding something like a public force_rotation() function that grabs the lock and calls the private rotate(). * Given the addition of is_rotated() in LogOutput, then get_archive_name() should be removed. Thanks, Marcus Thanks

Re: JEP 158: Unified JVM Logging

Hi, Sorry for my late reply. I think being able to force rotation via jcmd seems like a good feature. Files are currently opened in append mode so it should already be possible to use external log rotation tools by copying and truncating the files. Still I think it would be nice to provide th

Re: RFR: 8139564: Convert TraceDefaultMethods to Unified Logging

Hi, On 2015-10-16 18:21, Coleen Phillimore wrote: Hi, I added the serviceability group so they can comment on this as well. I think having logging in the PRODUCT build is requested so that we can more easily debug customer problems. That said, we will not enable logging in product if we

Re: RFR (XXS): 8064348: Add TraceEvent::is_enabled() for embedded/minimal builds

k_jfr tests. /Staffan Thanks, Erik On 2014-11-07 16:32, Marcus Larsson wrote: Hi, Can I please have reviews for the following small patch to enable usage of TraceEvent::is_enabled() even when INCLUDE_TRACE is not defined? Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8064348/webrev.00/ Bug:

RFR (XXS): 8064348: Add TraceEvent::is_enabled() for embedded/minimal builds

Hi, Can I please have reviews for the following small patch to enable usage of TraceEvent::is_enabled() even when INCLUDE_TRACE is not defined? Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8064348/webrev.00/ Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8064348 Thanks, Marcus

<    1   2