October 2015 - aarch64-port-dev

Support large codecache for JDK8
by Andrew Dinn 26 Nov '15

26 Nov '15

Attached for review is a patch which adds large codecache support to jdk8 (jdk7 version will be next). It passes basic smoke tests (java hello, javac Hello.java, netbeans build and run simple project). Ok to push? regards, Andrew Dinn -----------

3 7

[REDO] Elide more final field's write memory barrier with escape analysis result
by Hui Shi 14 Nov '15

14 Nov '15

Fixing regression https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139750, root cause is stable field's allocation doesn't always dominate MemBarRelease node created for stable field write. Could someone help review and sponsor this changeset? bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139758 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hshi/8139758/webrev_v2/ Analyzing java/util/Map/Defaults.java Error message is "assert(!had_error) failed: bad dominance". Assertion fails because MemBarRelease's Precedent input (checkCastPP node) doesn't dominate MemBarRelease node. Checking fail compilation method java/lang/invoke/MethodType.makeImpl 1. early return when mt is not null. 2. stable field write is applied on newly created MethodType object. 3. MemBarRelease is created with Precedent input (allocation "new MethodType(rtype, ptypes, trusted)") 4. MemBarRelease is created at the exit of this method. As early return exits in this method, MemBarRealse is not dominated by its Precedent input. This problem doesn't show up before my early change, because Precedent input is only set for boxed type instance and no stable field in boxed type. MethodType makeImpl(Class<?> rtype, Class<?>[] ptypes, boolean trusted) { MethodType mt = internTable.get(new MethodType(ptypes, rtype)); if (mt != null) return mt; if (ptypes.length == 0) { ptypes = NO_PTYPES; trusted = true; } mt = new MethodType(rtype, ptypes, trusted); // promote the object to the Real Thing, and reprobe mt.form = MethodTypeForm.findForm(mt); // stable field write return internTable.add(mt); } For this reason, adding Precedent input for stable field store's MemBarRealse is skipped in new patch. For final field store, allocation always dominate MemBarRelease. Because allocation is immediately before initializer method and method has only one entry. New patch includes: 1. In do_put_xxx, set_alloc_with_final when filed is final and can find its allocation. Remove constrains for boxed type check. 2. Skip setting MemBarRelease's Precedent input for stable field write. There is no performance degradation here, before this change MemBarRelease precedent input isn't set as alloc_with_final is only update for boxed class and no stable field in boxed class. Early discussion about why these constrains need removed and can be removed is in http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-October/01… Regards Shi Hui

3 10

Project proposal: AArch32 port
by Edward Nevill 09 Nov '15

09 Nov '15

Hi, I would like to propose the creation of a new project to port OpenJDK to ARM's aarch32 architecture. The aarch32 architecture is the 32 bit side of the ARMv8 architecture (the other side being aarch64). There is already a port for aarch64 which has been upstreamed into JDK9, thanks to the great work of Andrew Haley, Andrew Dinn and others however 32 bit support is missing. The aarch64 architecture is broadly compatible with ARMv7 with only a few minor differences most of which are not applicable to application level code. It is proposed that the aarch32 port will also support ARMv7. ARMv6 could also be supported, but this would depend on the level of community interest (ARMv6 is the architecture in the Raspberry Pi so there may be significant community interest and involvement if we were also to target ARMv6). We already have a complete template interpreter thanks to the excellent work of Joseph Joyce who presented his work at the recent Linaro Connect conference. A copy of his slides is available at http://openjdk.linaro.org/sfo15-openjdk-arm32.pdf I have created a JIRA issue and uploaded webrevs of this port based on JDK 9 to cr.openjdk.java.net. JIRA Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139303 Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8139303/webrev.hotspot/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8139303/webrev.hs-comp/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8139303/webrev.jdk/ The template interpreter is complete and runs a large variety of applications (eclipse, jedit, galaxians, javac, although sadly it cannot build itself as yet:-). It is intended that the port will be a complete port of OpenJDK to include Template Interpreter / C1 and possibly C2. Can I please request the support of the Porters Group as the Sponsoring Group with myself as project lead. Many thanks, Edward Nevill

4 8

hg: aarch64-port/jdk8/hotspot: 2 new changesets
by edward.nevill＠gmail.com 28 Oct '15

28 Oct '15

Changeset: acaa2f3db91b Author: enevill Date: 2015-10-28 17:47 +0000 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8/hotspot/rev/acaa2f3db91b Fix thinko when backporting 8131645. Table ends up being allocated twice. ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/g1/g1CodeCacheRemSet.cpp Changeset: e903061ac7ca Author: enevill Date: 2015-10-28 17:51 +0000 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8/hotspot/rev/e903061ac7ca 8140611: aarch64: jtreg test jdk/tools/pack200/UnpackerMemoryTest.java SEGVs Summary: Fix register usage on calling native synchronized methods Reviewed-by: kvn, adinn ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/sharedRuntime_aarch64.cpp

1 0

RFR: 8140611: aarch64: jtreg test jdk/tools/pack200/UnpackerMemoryTest.java SEGVs
by Edward Nevill 28 Oct '15

28 Oct '15

Hi, Please review the following webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8140611/webrev/ JIRA Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140611 Summary: The UnpackerMemoryTest SEGVs in jni_GetStringUTFChars. The problem is that c_rarg3 is a really bad choice for a tmp register since at this point the native arguments have been loaded into registers. (I confess guilt for this). 'lr' is a much better choice for the tmp register. We know this is free because we are just about to do a 'rt_call' which clobbers lr in any case. Thanks for the review, Ed.

3 4

JTREG, SPECjbb2013 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 8 on AArch64
by Edward Nevill 27 Oct '15

27 Oct '15

This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 10 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/openjdk8-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2015/300/sum… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 605; fail: 55; error: 2 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 605; fail: 55; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 606; fail: 54; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 636; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 636; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 637; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 636; fail: 46; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 636; fail: 46; error: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 637; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 637; fail: 45; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 5,359; fail: 208; error: 24 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 5,350; fail: 217; error: 24 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 5,353; fail: 219; error: 19 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 5,499; fail: 230; error: 20 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 5,485; fail: 242; error: 22 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 5,502; fail: 233; error: 18 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 5,477; fail: 254; error: 22 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 5,477; fail: 254; error: 22 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 5,482; fail: 254; error: 17 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 5,472; fail: 259; error: 22 1 fatal errors were detected; please follow the link above for more detail. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 3,063; error: 10 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 3,062; error: 11 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 3,054; fail: 4; error: 15 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 3,076; error: 15 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 3,080; error: 11 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 3,081; error: 10 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 3,077; error: 14 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 3,081; error: 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 625; fail: 32; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 628; fail: 32; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 626; fail: 33; error: 3 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 644; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 644; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 644; fail: 38; error: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 644; fail: 38; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 5,354; fail: 208; error: 29 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 5,358; fail: 209; error: 24 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 5,357; fail: 213; error: 21 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 5,510; fail: 215; error: 24 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 5,506; fail: 221; error: 22 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 5,512; fail: 217; error: 24 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 5,471; fail: 257; error: 25 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 5,471; fail: 257; error: 25 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 5,489; fail: 241; error: 23 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 5,495; fail: 234; error: 24 1 fatal errors were detected; please follow the link above for more detail. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 3,063; error: 10 Build 1: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 3,063; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 3,064; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 3,083; error: 8 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 3,081; error: 10 Build 6: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 8: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 3,082; fail: 2; error: 7 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/27 pass: 3,083; error: 8 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/openjdk8-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2013 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2013 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2014-04-01. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2013 tests are run on a system which is not production ready and does not meet all the requirements for publishing compliant results. The numbers below shall be treated as non-compliant (nc) and are for experimental purposes only. Relative performance: Server max-jOPS (nc): 1.15x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 1.52x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/SPECjbb2013-1.00-results/ [1] http://www.spec.org/fairuse.html#Academic Regression test Hadoop-Terasort completed ========================================= This test measures the performance of the server and client compilers running Hadoop sorting a 1GB file using Terasort and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the Zero interpreter and against the baseline performance of the client and server compilers on 2014-04-01. Relative performance: Zero: 1.0, Client: 50.05, Server: 82.54 Client 50.05 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.16x Server 82.54 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.16x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 10 days. 2015-04-17 pass rate: 11555/11555, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/107/results/ 2015-05-29 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/149/results/ 2015-06-02 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/153/results/ 2015-07-02 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/183/results/ 2015-07-08 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/189/results/ 2015-07-21 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/202/results/ 2015-09-04 pass rate: 11555/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/247/results/ 2015-09-08 pass rate: 11555/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/251/results/ 2015-10-22 pass rate: 11558/11558, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/295/results/ 2015-10-27 pass rate: 11558/11558, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/300/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/

1 0

RFR: 8140582: aarch64: jvm fails to initialise after 8078556
by Edward Nevill 27 Oct '15

27 Oct '15

Hi, Please review the following webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~enevill/8140582/webrev/ JIRA Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140582 The vm fails to initialises with the following error on aarch64 systems with 64K pagesize ed@arm64:~/jdk9-dev/hs-comp/hotspot$ /home/ed/images/jdk/bin/java intx StackYellowPages=1 is outside the allowed range [ 2 ... 7 ] intx StackShadowPages=1 is outside the allowed range [ 4 ... 34 ] Error: Could not create the Java Virtual Machine. Error: A fatal exception has occurred. Program will exit. The problem is the following code in src/os/linux/vm/os_linux.cpp // If the pagesize of the VM is greater than 8K determine the appropriate // number of initial guard pages. The user can change this with the // command line arguments, if needed. if (vm_page_size() > (int)Linux::vm_default_page_size()) { StackYellowPages = 1; StackRedPages = 1; StackShadowPages = round_to((StackShadowPages*Linux::vm_default_page_size()), vm_page_size()) / vm_page_size(); } My proposed fix is to set MIN_STACK_YELLOW_PAGES, MIN_STACK_RED_PAGES, and MIN_STACK_SHADOW_PAGES to 1 in globals_aarch64.hpp Thanks for the review, Ed.

2 1

Why is 8079315 only specific to x86? and why is it not in JDK8?
by Andrew Dinn 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

I noticed what looks to me like an anomaly when backporting the volatile object/CAS optimizations to JDK8 and wondered if someone could explain it to me. Why is the fix for 8079315: UseCondCardMark broken in conjunction with CMS precleaning on x86 only applied for x86? This JDK9 patch modifies the shared C1 and C2 code to plant a StoreLoad into the card mark code when UseCondCardMark is true and CMS is in use. It also modifies macroAssembler_x86.cpp to insert a StoreLoad inside routine store_check. However, store_check in macroAssembler_aarch64.cpp does not include a StoreLoad. Surely it ought to? n.b. the related patch for the interpreter 8078438: Interpreter should support conditional card marks (UseCondCardMark) on x86 and aarch64 includes modifications for both architectures. It looks to me like 8079315 (and 8078438) probably ought to be backported to JDK8 but it seems Oracle have not done so and hence that we have not done it either. This is relevant to the vol obj/CAS backport to jdk8-aarch64 because that patch includes special case handling for CMS to cope with the extra MemBarVolatile that may result from this patch being applied to C2. It copes ok if the MemBarVolatile is not generated because that can happen when e.g. a NULL value is written. But the extra case handling only really makes sense if 8079315 is backported to jdk8-aarch64 (I still prefer to leave it in just in case they do get backported otherwise the backprot will break the vol obj/CAS handling). regards, Andrew Dinn -----------

1 0

hg: aarch64-port/jdk8/hotspot: Backport optimization of volatile puts/gets and CAS to use ldar/stlr
by adinn＠redhat.com 26 Oct '15

26 Oct '15

Changeset: 3ccdd3482827 Author: adinn Date: 2015-10-08 11:06 -0400 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8/hotspot/rev/3ccdd3482827 Backport optimization of volatile puts/gets and CAS to use ldar/stlr ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/globals_aarch64.hpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/macroAssembler_aarch64.cpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/macroAssembler_aarch64.hpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/vm_version_aarch64.cpp ! src/share/vm/opto/graphKit.cpp

1 0

JTREG, SPECjbb2013 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 8 on AArch64
by Edward Nevill 23 Oct '15

23 Oct '15

This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 10 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/openjdk8-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2015/295/sum… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 606; fail: 54; error: 2 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 605; fail: 55; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 605; fail: 55; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 606; fail: 54; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 636; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 636; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 637; fail: 45; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 636; fail: 46; error: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 636; fail: 46; error: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 637; fail: 45; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 5,354; fail: 216; error: 18 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 5,359; fail: 208; error: 24 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 5,350; fail: 217; error: 24 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 5,353; fail: 219; error: 19 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 5,499; fail: 230; error: 20 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 5,485; fail: 242; error: 22 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 5,502; fail: 233; error: 18 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 5,477; fail: 254; error: 22 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 5,477; fail: 254; error: 22 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 5,482; fail: 254; error: 17 1 fatal errors were detected; please follow the link above for more detail. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 3,063; error: 10 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 3,063; error: 10 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 3,062; error: 11 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 3,054; fail: 4; error: 15 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 3,076; error: 15 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 3,080; error: 11 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 3,081; error: 10 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 3,077; error: 14 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 626; fail: 32; error: 4 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 625; fail: 32; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 628; fail: 32; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 626; fail: 33; error: 3 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 644; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 644; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 645; fail: 37; error: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 644; fail: 38; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 5,348; fail: 207; error: 33 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 5,354; fail: 208; error: 29 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 5,358; fail: 209; error: 24 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 5,357; fail: 213; error: 21 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 5,510; fail: 215; error: 24 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 5,506; fail: 221; error: 22 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 5,512; fail: 217; error: 24 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 5,471; fail: 257; error: 25 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 5,471; fail: 257; error: 25 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 5,489; fail: 241; error: 23 1 fatal errors were detected; please follow the link above for more detail. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2015/mar/06 pass: 3,065; error: 8 Build 1: aarch64/2015/apr/17 pass: 3,063; error: 10 Build 2: aarch64/2015/may/29 pass: 3,063; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2015/jun/02 pass: 3,064; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2015/jul/02 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 5: aarch64/2015/jul/08 pass: 3,083; error: 8 Build 6: aarch64/2015/jul/21 pass: 3,081; error: 10 Build 7: aarch64/2015/sep/04 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 8: aarch64/2015/sep/08 pass: 3,078; error: 13 Build 9: aarch64/2015/oct/22 pass: 3,082; fail: 2; error: 7 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/openjdk8-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2013 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2013 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2014-04-01. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2013 tests are run on a system which is not production ready and does not meet all the requirements for publishing compliant results. The numbers below shall be treated as non-compliant (nc) and are for experimental purposes only. Relative performance: Server max-jOPS (nc): 1.24x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 1.57x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/SPECjbb2013-1.00-results/ [1] http://www.spec.org/fairuse.html#Academic Regression test Hadoop-Terasort completed ========================================= This test measures the performance of the server and client compilers running Hadoop sorting a 1GB file using Terasort and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the Zero interpreter and against the baseline performance of the client and server compilers on 2014-04-01. Relative performance: Zero: 1.0, Client: 49.7, Server: 85.03 Client 49.7 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.16x Server 85.03 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.20x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 10 days. 2015-03-06 pass rate: 11551/11551, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/065/results/ 2015-04-17 pass rate: 11555/11555, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/107/results/ 2015-05-29 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/149/results/ 2015-06-02 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/153/results/ 2015-07-02 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/183/results/ 2015-07-08 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/189/results/ 2015-07-21 pass rate: 11556/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/202/results/ 2015-09-04 pass rate: 11555/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/247/results/ 2015-09-08 pass rate: 11555/11556, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/251/results/ 2015-10-22 pass rate: 11558/11558, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/2015/295/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jcstress-nightly-runs/

1 0