Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-10-08 Thread Igor Ignatyev
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 11:00:41 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: > @iignatev I resolved the conflict in whitebox.cpp and fixed a minor style nit > on the way. Could you take a look? LGTM - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/49

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-10-08 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 10:58:56 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: >> @voitylov For future reference please don't force-push commits on open PRs >> as it breaks the commit history. I can no >> longer just look at the two most recent commits and see what they added >> relative to what I had previously rev

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-10-08 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 02:00:06 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> I added the contributors that could be found in the portola project commits. >> If anyone knows some other contributors I >> missed, I'll be happy to stand corrected. > > @voitylov For future reference please don't force-push commits on ope

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-10-05 Thread David Holmes
On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 10:56:56 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: >> thank you Alan, Erik, and David! When the JEP becomes Targeted, I'll use >> this PR to integrate the changes. > > I added the contributors that could be found in the portola project commits. > If anyone knows some other contributors

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-18 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 06:30:50 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: >> Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer). > > thank you Alan, Erik, and David! When the JEP becomes Targeted, I'll use this > PR to integrate the changes. I added the contributors that could be found in the portola project commits. I

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-13 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 04:18:39 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> Aleksei Voitylov has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port > > Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer). thank you Alan,

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-13 Thread David Holmes
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 07:36:57 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: >> test/hotspot/jtreg/runtime/StackGuardPages/exeinvoke.c line 282: >> >>> 280: >>> 281: pthread_attr_init(&thread_attr); >>> 282: pthread_attr_setstacksize(&thread_attr, stack_size); >> >> Just a comment in response to the explanat

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-13 Thread David Holmes
On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 00:08:35 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> Aleksei Voitylov has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port > > Attempting to use the GitHub UI for further review. If this

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-13 Thread David Holmes
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 07:03:37 GMT, Aleksei Voitylov wrote: >> continuing the review thread from here >> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2020-September/068546.html >> >>> The download side of using JNI in these tests is that it complicates the >>> setup a bit for those that

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-11 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 23:44:58 GMT, David Holmes wrote: >> Aleksei Voitylov has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port > > make/autoconf/platform.m4 line 536: > >> 534: AC_SUBST(H

Re: RFR: JDK-8247589: Implementation of Alpine Linux/x64 Port [v2]

2020-09-11 Thread Aleksei Voitylov
> continuing the review thread from here > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2020-September/068546.html > >> The download side of using JNI in these tests is that it complicates the >> setup a bit for those that run jtreg directly and/or just build the JDK >> and not the test