From ci_notify at linaro.org Wed Mar 1 15:10:15 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:10:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1263619036.4138.1488381015640.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/059/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/12 pass: 1,270; fail: 24; error: 83 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 1,266; fail: 25; error: 86 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,296; fail: 24; error: 57 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 7,210; fail: 654; error: 61 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,271; fail: 628; error: 24 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 3,796; fail: 1; error: 25 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,820; fail: 1; error: 11 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 1,291; fail: 28; error: 61 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,367; fail: 8; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 7,251; fail: 617; error: 57 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,278; fail: 622; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 3,792; fail: 1; error: 29 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,825; error: 7 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 8: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 14: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.05x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.90x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 71.65, Server: 109.42 Client 71.65 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 109.42 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.54x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-13 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/012/results/ 2017-01-14 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/013/results/ 2017-01-15 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/014/results/ 2017-01-24 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/023/results/ 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From ci_notify at linaro.org Thu Mar 2 20:04:48 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 20:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <484885495.4478.1488485089354.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/060/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 1,266; fail: 25; error: 86 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,296; fail: 24; error: 57 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,271; fail: 628; error: 24 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,820; fail: 1; error: 11 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,367; fail: 8; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,278; fail: 622; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,825; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.05x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.86x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.02, Server: 110.27 Client 72.02 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 110.27 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.55x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-14 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/013/results/ 2017-01-15 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/014/results/ 2017-01-24 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/023/results/ 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From Derek.White at cavium.com Thu Mar 2 20:42:38 2017 From: Derek.White at cavium.com (White, Derek) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 20:42:38 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: <484885495.4478.1488485089354.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> References: <484885495.4478.1488485089354.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> Message-ID: Question about the jcstress failures 3/2/2017. Aleksey's C1 fix got pushed to jdk9/hs on 3/1/2017. I am assuming that these tests are using JDK9 build from jdk9/dev? So it doesn't have the fix yet? Thanks! - Derek -----Original Message----- From: aarch64-port-dev [mailto:aarch64-port-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of ci_notify at linaro.org Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2017 3:05 PM To: stuart.monteith at linaro.org; fathi.boudra at linaro.org; aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/060/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/13 pass: 1,266; fail: 25; error: 86 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,296; fail: 24; error: 57 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,271; fail: 628; error: 24 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,820; fail: 1; error: 11 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,367; fail: 8; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,278; fail: 622; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,825; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 7: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 13: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.05x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.86x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.02, Server: 110.27 Client 72.02 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 110.27 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.55x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-14 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/013/results/ 2017-01-15 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/014/results/ 2017-01-24 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/023/results/ 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From shade at redhat.com Thu Mar 2 20:45:24 2017 From: shade at redhat.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 21:45:24 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: References: <484885495.4478.1488485089354.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> Message-ID: <15977055-87fe-d2b6-2069-ea499bf91089@redhat.com> On 03/02/2017 09:42 PM, White, Derek wrote: > Question about the jcstress failures 3/2/2017. > > Aleksey's C1 fix got pushed to jdk9/hs on 3/1/2017. I am assuming that these > tests are using JDK9 build from jdk9/dev? So it doesn't have the fix yet? Seems to be. I added a ton of *.acqrel.* tests in jcstress recently to cover those class of bugs. Hence the failures until that fix propagates. Thanks, -Aleksey From stuart.monteith at linaro.org Thu Mar 2 22:20:58 2017 From: stuart.monteith at linaro.org (Stuart Monteith) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 22:20:58 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: <15977055-87fe-d2b6-2069-ea499bf91089@redhat.com> References: <484885495.4478.1488485089354.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> <15977055-87fe-d2b6-2069-ea499bf91089@redhat.com> Message-ID: Hi, The automation runs against jdk9/dev, yesterday I confirmed manually that the tests pass with Aleksey's patch applied and don't without. There are a couple of failures apparently in C2 in the following cases: org.openjdk.jcstress.tests.coherence.varHandles.fields.opaque.ShortTest org.openjdk.jcstress.tests.coherence.varHandles.fields.opaque.ByteTest I'm only seeing it occur on one architecture, not ThunderX, and I'm not seeing the CharTest fail. I've been going through various options and the assembler dumps, but so far not gotten to the bottom of it yet. Most recently I tried changing the values for CharTest from 'A' to '\uFFFF', alas, with no luck. BR, Stuart On 02/03/17 20:45, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > On 03/02/2017 09:42 PM, White, Derek wrote: >> Question about the jcstress failures 3/2/2017. >> >> Aleksey's C1 fix got pushed to jdk9/hs on 3/1/2017. I am assuming that these >> tests are using JDK9 build from jdk9/dev? So it doesn't have the fix yet? > > Seems to be. I added a ton of *.acqrel.* tests in jcstress recently to cover > those class of bugs. Hence the failures until that fix propagates. > > Thanks, > -Aleksey > From ci_notify at linaro.org Sat Mar 4 00:46:10 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Sat, 4 Mar 2017 00:46:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <869252294.4740.1488588370605.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/061/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/14 pass: 1,296; fail: 24; error: 57 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,234; fail: 630; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,271; fail: 628; error: 24 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,806; error: 17 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,820; fail: 1; error: 11 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 1,294; fail: 27; error: 59 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,367; fail: 8; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 7,240; fail: 624; error: 62 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,278; fail: 622; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/22 pass: 3,800; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,825; error: 7 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 12: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.05x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.88x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 71.65, Server: 111.14 Client 71.65 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 111.14 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.57x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-15 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/014/results/ 2017-01-24 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/023/results/ 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From ci_notify at linaro.org Sun Mar 5 06:22:44 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 06:22:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <510819280.4853.1488694964867.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/062/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,271; fail: 628; error: 24 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,820; fail: 1; error: 11 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 1,367; fail: 8; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 7,278; fail: 622; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/23 pass: 3,825; error: 7 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 5: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 11: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.06x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.87x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 71.65, Server: 109.42 Client 71.65 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 109.42 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.54x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-24 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/023/results/ 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From rkennke at redhat.com Mon Mar 6 14:51:47 2017 From: rkennke at redhat.com (Roman Kennke) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:51:47 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Import 6 more Shenandoah fixes Message-ID: <209a7841-e947-2dad-be80-b12a4989ce82@redhat.com> Testing of the last backport and merge has brought up a bunch of fixes that I would like to get in. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/aarch64-import-2017-03-06/webrev.00/ It is equivalent to these 6 fixes: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-February/001764.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001771.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001783.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001787.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001792.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001796.html Ok to push? Roman From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 6 15:49:40 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 15:49:40 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Import 6 more Shenandoah fixes In-Reply-To: <209a7841-e947-2dad-be80-b12a4989ce82@redhat.com> References: <209a7841-e947-2dad-be80-b12a4989ce82@redhat.com> Message-ID: <83033524-67d9-d073-7e2c-7352c28e7377@redhat.com> On 06/03/17 14:51, Roman Kennke wrote: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/aarch64-import-2017-03-06/webrev.00/ > > It is equivalent to these 6 fixes: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-February/001764.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001771.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001783.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001787.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001792.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001796.html > > Ok to push? All looks reasonable, thanks. Andrew. From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:56:03 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:56:03 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-02-20 Message-ID: <201703061656.v26Gu3bF011968@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 8f40da5ea60b Author: rkennke Date: 2017-02-28 23:09 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/8f40da5ea60b Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-02-20 ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahCollectorPolicy.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahConcurrentMark.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.inline.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegion.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegion.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoah_globals.hpp ! test/gc/shenandoah/TestRegionSizeArgs.java ! test/gc/shenandoah/compiler/TestWriteBarrierClearControl.java From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:56:50 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:56:50 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 67320969f73b Message-ID: <201703061656.v26GuoSg012134@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 6e0541180a04 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:55 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/rev/6e0541180a04 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 67320969f73b ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:57:03 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:57:03 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 65a9af44381a Message-ID: <201703061657.v26Gv33a012281@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 7e900598caf1 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:55 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba/rev/7e900598caf1 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 65a9af44381a ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:57:20 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:57:20 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 399c0a623424 Message-ID: <201703061657.v26GvK0Y012359@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 03f7b9eaa28f Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:56 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp/rev/03f7b9eaa28f Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 399c0a623424 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:57:34 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:57:34 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8ff4ff7556aa Message-ID: <201703061657.v26GvYdQ012501@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 42483b51d670 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:56 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws/rev/42483b51d670 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8ff4ff7556aa ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:57:47 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:57:47 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 54e3aa317caf Message-ID: <201703061657.v26Gvlh2012567@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 1ff03b49eb3b Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:56 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools/rev/1ff03b49eb3b Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 54e3aa317caf ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:58:01 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:58:01 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8b2ea45664ce Message-ID: <201703061658.v26Gw1Fq012668@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: e1552696c636 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:56 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk/rev/e1552696c636 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8b2ea45664ce ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Mon Mar 6 16:58:17 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2017 16:58:17 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset dd124ae80d56 Message-ID: <201703061658.v26GwHUF012785@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 1ae316fcdc91 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:56 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn/rev/1ae316fcdc91 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset dd124ae80d56 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Tue Mar 7 14:17:06 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:17:06 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8f40da5ea60b Message-ID: <201703071417.v27EH6aM006142@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 8efa8a121cfd Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-06 17:55 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/8efa8a121cfd Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 for changeset 8f40da5ea60b ! .hgtags From rkennke at redhat.com Wed Mar 8 12:42:55 2017 From: rkennke at redhat.com (Roman Kennke) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:42:55 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Import 2 Shenandoah build fixes Message-ID: <7f2048fd-c7d8-5826-822c-3e3e94ff1e8b@redhat.com> We found build issues on oldish compilers and i586 platform. This small import fixes those issues. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/aarch64-import-2017-03-08/webrev.00/ It is equivalent to those two patches: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001820.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001822.html Ok? Roman From aph at redhat.com Wed Mar 8 13:16:25 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:16:25 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Import 2 Shenandoah build fixes In-Reply-To: <7f2048fd-c7d8-5826-822c-3e3e94ff1e8b@redhat.com> References: <7f2048fd-c7d8-5826-822c-3e3e94ff1e8b@redhat.com> Message-ID: <61f6348d-8886-4809-a67a-c509a020ee25@redhat.com> On 08/03/17 12:42, Roman Kennke wrote: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001820.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/shenandoah-dev/2017-March/001822.html > > Ok? OK. Andrew. From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:19:54 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:19:54 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 Message-ID: <201703081319.v28DJs5L002309@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 8e8bcaa62dc3 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 13:39 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/8e8bcaa62dc3 Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-06 ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahTaskqueue.hpp ! src/share/vm/opto/shenandoahSupport.cpp From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:20:30 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:20:30 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 6e0541180a04 Message-ID: <201703081320.v28DKUcg002553@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: b03b87e66f29 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/rev/b03b87e66f29 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 6e0541180a04 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:20:40 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:20:40 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 7e900598caf1 Message-ID: <201703081320.v28DKeGt002632@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 2992b42a002a Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba/rev/2992b42a002a Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 7e900598caf1 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:20:52 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:20:52 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 8e8bcaa62dc3 Message-ID: <201703081320.v28DKqEI002694@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: dc094c143fe4 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/dc094c143fe4 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 8e8bcaa62dc3 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:21:05 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:21:05 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 03f7b9eaa28f Message-ID: <201703081321.v28DL5V6002797@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: da939a05d807 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp/rev/da939a05d807 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 03f7b9eaa28f ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:21:17 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:21:17 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 42483b51d670 Message-ID: <201703081321.v28DLHGW002878@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: b542de391678 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws/rev/b542de391678 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 42483b51d670 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:22:31 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:22:31 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset e1552696c636 Message-ID: <201703081322.v28DMVxW003356@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: f5a4b48e2676 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk/rev/f5a4b48e2676 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset e1552696c636 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:22:45 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:22:45 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 1ff03b49eb3b Message-ID: <201703081322.v28DMjD0003470@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 0255beea672f Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:19 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools/rev/0255beea672f Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 1ff03b49eb3b ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Wed Mar 8 13:22:58 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 13:22:58 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 1ae316fcdc91 Message-ID: <201703081322.v28DMw28003538@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 834ad96baa04 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-08 14:20 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn/rev/834ad96baa04 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-08 for changeset 1ae316fcdc91 ! .hgtags From mvala at redhat.com Wed Mar 8 14:18:50 2017 From: mvala at redhat.com (Michal Vala) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 15:18:50 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows Message-ID: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> Hi, we're unable to build on windows due to link issue /out:genSocketOptionRegistry.exe /out:ut:r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.obj LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file 'ut:r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe' make[2]: *** [gensrc/GensrcMisc.gmk:75: /cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe] Error 2 This fix the issue: aarch64-port/jdk8u - https://michalvala.fedorapeople.org/webrevs/gensrcmisclinker-aarch64/webrev.00/ aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah - https://michalvala.fedorapeople.org/webrevs/gensrcmisclinker-aarch64-shenandoah/webrev.00/ -- -Michal From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 04:09:05 2017 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 23:09:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> Message-ID: <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Hi, > we're unable to build on windows due to link issue > > /out:genSocketOptionRegistry.exe > /out:ut:r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe > > r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.obj > > LINK : fatal error LNK1104: cannot open file > 'ut:r:/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe' > make[2]: *** [gensrc/GensrcMisc.gmk:75: > /cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe] > Error 2 > > > This fix the issue: > aarch64-port/jdk8u - > https://michalvala.fedorapeople.org/webrevs/gensrcmisclinker-aarch64/webrev.00/ > aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah - > https://michalvala.fedorapeople.org/webrevs/gensrcmisclinker-aarch64-shenandoah/webrev.00/ > > -- > -Michal > This is a divergence from upstream jdk8u, silently introduced by: changeset: 11016:391be061dfc7 parent: 11015:7ebad38ac2b3 parent: 8810:fc4ac66aa657 user: Edward Nevill edward.nevill at linaro.org date: Mon Dec 23 13:00:14 2013 +0000 summary: Remerge to jdk8-b117 Have you tested that reverting this to the upstream jdk8u version doesn't break aarch64? I did a comparison of upstream jdk8u121-b14 with the current state of aarch64/jdk8u (attached) and all other changes do seem to be necessary for aarch64 (the test issue is a merge issue already resolved in the main jdk8u tree, but not jdk8u121-b14). -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Web Site: http://fuseyism.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: aarch64.jdk.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 6962 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mvala at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 07:24:04 2017 From: mvala at redhat.com (Michal Vala) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:24:04 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> > Have you tested that reverting this to the upstream jdk8u version doesn't break aarch64? > > I did a comparison of upstream jdk8u121-b14 with the current state of aarch64/jdk8u (attached) > and all other changes do seem to be necessary for aarch64 (the test issue is a merge issue > already resolved in the main jdk8u tree, but not jdk8u121-b14). > Haven't tried on aarch64, but I'll do. -- -Michal From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 08:57:37 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 08:57:37 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <62d874b6-9d95-3af5-488b-f25a5a29866a@redhat.com> We shouldn't just change fron CC to LD and back without some kind of explanation. Why did one work, and not another? Andrew. From mvala at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 13:04:32 2017 From: mvala at redhat.com (Michal Vala) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 14:04:32 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <84083dd8-5207-7a49-d49b-304802bc70e3@redhat.com> On 03/09/2017 08:24 AM, Michal Vala wrote: > >> Have you tested that reverting this to the upstream jdk8u version >> doesn't break aarch64? >> >> I did a comparison of upstream jdk8u121-b14 with the current state of >> aarch64/jdk8u (attached) >> and all other changes do seem to be necessary for aarch64 (the test >> issue is a merge issue >> already resolved in the main jdk8u tree, but not jdk8u121-b14). >> > > Haven't tried on aarch64, but I'll do. > How you please got the patch? I just could find this huge merge changeset under the hash [1]. If I tried to revert patch you sent "patch -R -p1 < ~/tmp/aarch64.jdk.patch" I got following error on aarch64: gmake[2]: *** No rule to make target `/mnt/ramdisk/tmp/aarch64-port-jdk8u/jdk/src/solaris/bin/aarch64/jvm.cfg', needed by `/mnt/ramdisk/tmp/aarch64-port-jdk8u/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/lib/aarch64/jvm.cfg'. Stop. With just LDEXE fix I sent, aarch64 build is ok. -- -Michal [1] - http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u/jdk/rev/391be061dfc7 From akashche at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 13:46:31 2017 From: akashche at redhat.com (Alex Kashchenko) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 13:46:31 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <84083dd8-5207-7a49-d49b-304802bc70e3@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> <84083dd8-5207-7a49-d49b-304802bc70e3@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1ac4e237-6e57-5b63-7b64-7eccadb70f2c@redhat.com> Hi, On 03/09/2017 01:04 PM, Michal Vala wrote: > > > On 03/09/2017 08:24 AM, Michal Vala wrote: >> >>> Have you tested that reverting this to the upstream jdk8u version >>> doesn't break aarch64? >>> >>> I did a comparison of upstream jdk8u121-b14 with the current state of >>> aarch64/jdk8u (attached) >>> and all other changes do seem to be necessary for aarch64 (the test >>> issue is a merge issue >>> already resolved in the main jdk8u tree, but not jdk8u121-b14). >>> >> >> Haven't tried on aarch64, but I'll do. >> > > How you please got the patch? I just could find this huge merge > changeset under the hash [1]. > > If I tried to revert patch you sent "patch -R -p1 < > ~/tmp/aarch64.jdk.patch" I got following error on aarch64: > > gmake[2]: *** No rule to make target > `/mnt/ramdisk/tmp/aarch64-port-jdk8u/jdk/src/solaris/bin/aarch64/jvm.cfg', > needed by > `/mnt/ramdisk/tmp/aarch64-port-jdk8u/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/lib/aarch64/jvm.cfg'. > Stop. > > > With just LDEXE fix I sent, aarch64 build is ok. I contributed the opposite change once for aarch32 [1]. Just checked with aarch64-jdk8u - proposed change breaks aarch64 cross-compilation (on ubuntu 16.04 x86_64 with --openjdk-target=aarch64-linux-gnu ) causing the following error: /usr/bin/ld: warning: cannot find entry symbol _start; defaulting to 00000000004000b0 /home/aarch64/jdk8u-aarch64/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.o: In function `out': genSocketOptionRegistry.c:(.text+0x10): undefined reference to `puts' /home/aarch64/jdk8u-aarch64/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.o: In function `emit': genSocketOptionRegistry.c:(.text+0x48): undefined reference to `printf' genSocketOptionRegistry.c:(.text+0x5c): undefined reference to `printf' gensrc/GensrcMisc.gmk:74: recipe for target '/home/aarch64/jdk8u-aarch64/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry' failed make[2]: *** [/home/aarch64/jdk8u-aarch64/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry] Error 1 Though this change is indeed required for windows builds, ojdkbuild brings a local patch for it [2]. [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/aarch32-port-dev/2016-February/000111.html [2] https://github.com/ojdkbuild/lookaside_java-1.8.0-openjdk/commit/e71366e75cabf16c0c7bd7789ec37b4f2925f93f -- -Alex From mvala at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 14:44:31 2017 From: mvala at redhat.com (Michal Vala) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:44:31 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <62d874b6-9d95-3af5-488b-f25a5a29866a@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <62d874b6-9d95-3af5-488b-f25a5a29866a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1c38b87c-94f4-b761-b62d-606164562dcf@redhat.com> On 03/09/2017 09:57 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > We shouldn't just change fron CC to LD and back without some kind of > explanation. Why did one work, and not another? Build tries to link binary (obj) file to executable (exe). When CC, it calls CL compiler, which results to total nonsense: cl -out:/cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe /cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.obj cl : Command line warning D9035 : option 'o' has been deprecated and will be removed in a future release it doesn't event know -out parameter and tries to go with -o and file "ut:..." so this is totally wrong. Also "genSocketOptionRegistry.obj" file is already binary. When LD, then "link" is used and binary obj is correctly linked to executable: link -out:/cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.exe /cygdrive/r/buildroot/jdk/btnative/genSocketOptionRegistry/genSocketOptionRegistry.obj > > Andrew. > However, as Alex pointed out[1], the patch breaks cross-compilation :/ -- -Michal [1] - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/aarch64-port-dev/2017-March/004298.html From rkennke at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 14:56:56 2017 From: rkennke at redhat.com (Roman Kennke) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:56:56 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR (XS): Fix Shenandoah argument checking on 32bit builds Message-ID: <5fcc3afd-e778-6e79-3f1b-7af6ef59c17e@redhat.com> This just popped up in Windows and 32bit builds. Can we have this in the integration repo too, please? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/fixargchecks32/webrev.00/ Roman From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 9 15:21:00 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 15:21:00 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR (XS): Fix Shenandoah argument checking on 32bit builds In-Reply-To: <5fcc3afd-e778-6e79-3f1b-7af6ef59c17e@redhat.com> References: <5fcc3afd-e778-6e79-3f1b-7af6ef59c17e@redhat.com> Message-ID: <6c8149f4-5429-af54-c608-9617ce914d91@redhat.com> On 09/03/17 14:56, Roman Kennke wrote: > This just popped up in Windows and 32bit builds. Can we have this in the > integration repo too, please? > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/fixargchecks32/webrev.00/ OK. Andrew. From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:22:04 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:22:04 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Fix Shenandoah argument checking on 32bit builds. Message-ID: <201703091522.v29FM45f007229@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 80777e2b7bb8 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 15:51 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/80777e2b7bb8 Fix Shenandoah argument checking on 32bit builds. ! src/share/vm/runtime/arguments.cpp From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:23:00 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:23:00 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset b03b87e66f29 Message-ID: <201703091523.v29FN0Jb007476@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 2a4586827492 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:21 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/rev/2a4586827492 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset b03b87e66f29 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:23:13 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:23:13 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 2992b42a002a Message-ID: <201703091523.v29FNDZf007564@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 78fc702ee864 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba/rev/78fc702ee864 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 2992b42a002a ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:24:28 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:24:28 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 80777e2b7bb8 Message-ID: <201703091524.v29FOSFO007956@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 64dd1ff63ce9 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:21 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/64dd1ff63ce9 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 80777e2b7bb8 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:25:20 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:25:20 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset da939a05d807 Message-ID: <201703091525.v29FPKG4008272@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: d956d399be10 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp/rev/d956d399be10 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset da939a05d807 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:25:52 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:25:52 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset b542de391678 Message-ID: <201703091525.v29FPqiA008482@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: a48d6d02673e Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws/rev/a48d6d02673e Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset b542de391678 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:26:04 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:26:04 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset f5a4b48e2676 Message-ID: <201703091526.v29FQ4DY008571@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 2ea76a2b648c Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk/rev/2ea76a2b648c Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset f5a4b48e2676 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:26:18 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:26:18 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 0255beea672f Message-ID: <201703091526.v29FQIwK008653@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: f1449eec62f8 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools/rev/f1449eec62f8 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 0255beea672f ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 9 15:26:30 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 15:26:30 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 834ad96baa04 Message-ID: <201703091526.v29FQU37008733@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 0ff6e0584b83 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-09 16:22 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn/rev/0ff6e0584b83 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 for changeset 834ad96baa04 ! .hgtags From ci_notify at linaro.org Thu Mar 9 16:42:19 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 16:42:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1281672276.468.1489077740011.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/067/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,269; fail: 641; error: 25 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,825; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 1,367; fail: 7; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 7,253; fail: 642; error: 40 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/24 pass: 3,824; error: 8 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 4: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 10: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.01x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.85x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.38, Server: 110.27 Client 72.38 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.68x Server 110.27 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.55x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-25 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/024/results/ 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From ci_notify at linaro.org Sun Mar 12 16:13:57 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 16:13:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1718105785.739.1489335238287.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/070/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,367; fail: 5; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,263; fail: 652; error: 22 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,827; fail: 1; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 7,283; fail: 628; error: 26 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/25 pass: 3,824; fail: 1; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 3: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 9: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.03x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.97x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 71.65, Server: 108.58 Client 71.65 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 108.58 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.53x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-27 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/025/results/ 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From mvala at redhat.com Mon Mar 13 09:20:59 2017 From: mvala at redhat.com (Michal Vala) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:20:59 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <1ac4e237-6e57-5b63-7b64-7eccadb70f2c@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> <84083dd8-5207-7a49-d49b-304802bc70e3@redhat.com> <1ac4e237-6e57-5b63-7b64-7eccadb70f2c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <23e52ba5-859f-8e72-32c4-a9c206ce13d2@redhat.com> On 03/09/2017 02:46 PM, Alex Kashchenko wrote: > > I contributed the opposite change once for aarch32 [1]. Just checked > with aarch64-jdk8u - proposed change breaks aarch64 cross-compilation > (on ubuntu 16.04 x86_64 with --openjdk-target=aarch64-linux-gnu ) > > Though this change is indeed required for windows builds, ojdkbuild > brings a local patch for it [2]. > ok, so what's the result of this for aarch64-port/jdk8u and aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah ? It breaks cross-compile but fix windows build. Upstream jdk8u has fixed version[3] > > [1] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/aarch32-port-dev/2016-February/000111.html > > [2] > https://github.com/ojdkbuild/lookaside_java-1.8.0-openjdk/commit/e71366e75cabf16c0c7bd7789ec37b4f2925f93f > > -- -Michal [3] - http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/file/8c93eb3fa1c0/make/gensrc/GensrcMisc.gmk#l79 From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 13 09:33:41 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:33:41 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: GensrcMisc.gmk linker issue on windows In-Reply-To: <23e52ba5-859f-8e72-32c4-a9c206ce13d2@redhat.com> References: <66947599-ec9e-eabe-18b4-37dcb5c022fd@redhat.com> <523417235.5848960.1489032545189.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <664efa9a-1b45-0303-d6f2-10e393e74d7c@redhat.com> <84083dd8-5207-7a49-d49b-304802bc70e3@redhat.com> <1ac4e237-6e57-5b63-7b64-7eccadb70f2c@redhat.com> <23e52ba5-859f-8e72-32c4-a9c206ce13d2@redhat.com> Message-ID: On 13/03/17 09:20, Michal Vala wrote: > ok, so what's the result of this for aarch64-port/jdk8u and > aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah ? > > It breaks cross-compile but fix windows build. Upstream jdk8u has fixed > version[3] This discussion has gone on for a very long time. I can't see any analysis of the problem which indicates what the actual problem is, and why the needs differ. Andrew. From ci_notify at linaro.org Tue Mar 14 16:20:37 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 16:20:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1596550251.923.1489508437542.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/072/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,368; fail: 4; error: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,278; fail: 639; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,829; fail: 1; error: 8 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 7,259; fail: 658; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/29 pass: 3,831; error: 7 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.02x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.92x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.02, Server: 110.27 Client 72.02 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.67x Server 110.27 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.55x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-01-30 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/029/results/ 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From stuart.monteith at linaro.org Wed Mar 15 11:01:26 2017 From: stuart.monteith at linaro.org (Stuart Monteith) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:01:26 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK 9 on Aarch64 overnight builds Message-ID: Hello, Because of the increased length of time for builds, builds and tests are taking over 24 hours to execute. To mitigate this the builds are set to build on every second day (if there are any changes). Regards, Stuart From smeyer at umich.edu Wed Mar 15 21:17:06 2017 From: smeyer at umich.edu (Seth Meyer) Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:17:06 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] question regarding the hadoop software stack you are using for your Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: Hello, Can anyone tell me about the hadoop software stack you are using for your Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64? We are deploying a hadoop cluster on aarch64 here at the U of Michigan. We would be curious to know what OS you are using, and which hadoop packages you are using (including version). Best, Seth Meyer Advanced Research Computing University of Michigan From stuart.monteith at linaro.org Thu Mar 16 13:45:00 2017 From: stuart.monteith at linaro.org (Stuart Monteith) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 13:45:00 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] question regarding the hadoop software stack you are using for your Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, We are running Hadoop 2.2.0 compiled for a demo in 2014, it is rather old. The benchmark is run on Ubuntu 16.04.01 . BR, Stuart On 15 March 2017 at 21:17, Seth Meyer wrote: > Hello, > > Can anyone tell me about the hadoop software stack you are using for your > Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64? > > We are deploying a hadoop cluster on aarch64 here at the U of Michigan. > > We would be curious to know what OS you are using, and which hadoop > packages you are using (including version). > > Best, > Seth Meyer > Advanced Research Computing > University of Michigan From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 16 16:50:10 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 16:50:10 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> I've just noticed a nasty problem. "java -version" on AArch64 gives no clue about which version of HotSpot, Oracle's or the aarch64-port project, is running. I hadn't realized that the version wasn't going to appear anywhere. And all that a crash says is # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x0000007fb7a0c2e4, pid=44736, tid=44737 # # JRE version: (9.0) (build ) # Java VM: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (9-internal+0-adhoc.aph.hs, mixed mode, tiered, compressed oops, g1 gc, linux-aarch64) There is a bit more in the log: --------------- S U M M A R Y ------------ Command Line: Host: AArch64 Processor rev 0 (aarch64), 48 cores, 62G, Random Linux Distro I guess the Oracle proprietary release will have the Oracle copyright etc., so that one wil be clear enough, and if it's from a Linux distro we'll know which port they use, unless some distro (Gentoo? Debian?) is crazy enough to package both versions, in which case it's their problem. I had assumed that Oracle's port would call itself "arm64" or somesuch, to distinguish it. Even the bug database only has "aarch32" and "aarch64", so it's going to be crazy hard to distinguish which port has a bug. We should really get that fixed. It's funny how this stuff comes out of the woodwork. Andrew. From ci_notify at linaro.org Thu Mar 16 17:05:26 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 17:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1072190756.1220.1489683927112.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/074/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,366; fail: 5; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,828; fail: 3; error: 7 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 7,300; fail: 614; error: 26 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/30 pass: 3,827; error: 11 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.00x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.86x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.38, Server: 108.58 Client 72.38 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.68x Server 108.58 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.53x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-01 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/030/results/ 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From bob.vandette at oracle.com Thu Mar 16 18:03:55 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:03:55 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> Message-ID: I agree that this is an issue but I?m not sure that it?s a show stopper. The Oracle build will not have OpenJDK in the version string which will help to differentiate our binaries from OpenJDK builds. The bug database field that I think you are describing is only an indication of the architecture that a bug can be reproduced on. It is not meant to describe the sources that were used to produce the binaries or where the binaries came from. That should to be specified elsewhere in the bug report. I don?t like the idea of listing arm64 in the version string since we are only using arm64 internally to trigger the use of the hotspot ?arm? directory. We?d also end up with lots of incorrect bug entries since folks will fail to use arm64 to report a bug in the Oracle 64-bit ARM port running on an aarch64 based system. If we start putting build configuration information in the version string, then where do we stop. Bob. > On Mar 16, 2017, at 12:50 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > I've just noticed a nasty problem. "java -version" on AArch64 gives > no clue about which version of HotSpot, Oracle's or the aarch64-port > project, is running. I hadn't realized that the version wasn't going > to appear anywhere. > > And all that a crash says is > > # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x0000007fb7a0c2e4, pid=44736, tid=44737 > # > # JRE version: (9.0) (build ) > # Java VM: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (9-internal+0-adhoc.aph.hs, mixed mode, tiered, compressed oops, g1 gc, linux-aarch64) > > There is a bit more in the log: > > --------------- S U M M A R Y ------------ > Command Line: > Host: AArch64 Processor rev 0 (aarch64), 48 cores, 62G, Random Linux Distro > > I guess the Oracle proprietary release will have the Oracle copyright > etc., so that one wil be clear enough, and if it's from a Linux distro > we'll know which port they use, unless some distro (Gentoo? Debian?) > is crazy enough to package both versions, in which case it's their > problem. > > I had assumed that Oracle's port would call itself "arm64" or > somesuch, to distinguish it. > > Even the bug database only has "aarch32" and "aarch64", so it's going > to be crazy hard to distinguish which port has a bug. We should > really get that fixed. > > It's funny how this stuff comes out of the woodwork. > > Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 16 18:27:49 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 18:27:49 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> Message-ID: <642003bd-a5dc-d1ae-87ff-aca50388cb9c@redhat.com> On 16/03/17 18:03, Bob Vandette wrote: > I agree that this is an issue but I?m not sure that it?s a show > stopper. > > The Oracle build will not have OpenJDK in the version string which > will help to differentiate our binaries from OpenJDK builds. Right, like I said. > The bug database field that I think you are describing is only an > indication of the architecture that a bug can be reproduced on. It > is not meant to describe the sources that were used to produce the > binaries or where the binaries came from. That should to be > specified elsewhere in the bug report. OK. I would surely have tried to insist that the version strings were different for our two ports at the time your port was committed, but I blew my chance. > I don?t like the idea of listing arm64 in the version string since > we are only using arm64 internally to trigger the use of the hotspot > ?arm? directory. We?d also end up with lots of incorrect bug > entries since folks will fail to use arm64 to report a bug in the > Oracle 64-bit ARM port running on an aarch64 based system. > > If we start putting build configuration information in the version > string, then where do we stop. It's going to be rather horrible, though. How do we reproduce a bug if we don't know what port is causing the bug? How do we even ask the question if we don't know what the ports are called? I always assumed we were "aarch64" and you were "arm64". How are we to ask a user if we can't tell them what to look for? Even if we don't change anything in OpenJDK itself, we'll still have to agree on a label to use in the bug database. I don't know what labels we should use, but we should agree on them now. Do you have any preferences? Andrew. From bob.vandette at oracle.com Thu Mar 16 18:40:00 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:40:00 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <642003bd-a5dc-d1ae-87ff-aca50388cb9c@redhat.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <642003bd-a5dc-d1ae-87ff-aca50388cb9c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4E700D62-8D04-47F7-9298-D1ED776BE376@oracle.com> > On Mar 16, 2017, at 2:27 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 16/03/17 18:03, Bob Vandette wrote: > >> I agree that this is an issue but I?m not sure that it?s a show >> stopper. >> >> The Oracle build will not have OpenJDK in the version string which >> will help to differentiate our binaries from OpenJDK builds. > > Right, like I said. > >> The bug database field that I think you are describing is only an >> indication of the architecture that a bug can be reproduced on. It >> is not meant to describe the sources that were used to produce the >> binaries or where the binaries came from. That should to be >> specified elsewhere in the bug report. > > OK. I would surely have tried to insist that the version strings were > different for our two ports at the time your port was committed, but I > blew my chance. > >> I don?t like the idea of listing arm64 in the version string since >> we are only using arm64 internally to trigger the use of the hotspot >> ?arm? directory. We?d also end up with lots of incorrect bug >> entries since folks will fail to use arm64 to report a bug in the >> Oracle 64-bit ARM port running on an aarch64 based system. >> >> If we start putting build configuration information in the version >> string, then where do we stop. > > It's going to be rather horrible, though. How do we reproduce a bug > if we don't know what port is causing the bug? How do we even ask the > question if we don't know what the ports are called? I always assumed > we were "aarch64" and you were "arm64". How are we to ask a user if > we can't tell them what to look for? > > Even if we don't change anything in OpenJDK itself, we'll still have > to agree on a label to use in the bug database. I don't know what > labels we should use, but we should agree on them now. Do you have > any preferences? I agree that a label would be very useful. For this purpose, I?m not opposed to using the arm64 versus aarch64 names. Let me check around to see if anyone has a better suggestion. Bob. > > Andrew. From chris.plummer at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 20:04:33 2017 From: chris.plummer at oracle.com (Chris Plummer) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:04:33 -0700 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> Message-ID: Hi Andrew, This change has inadvertently enabled the test for the Oracle arm64 port, which is now failing occasionally. I filed JDK-8177055. We need a better check than Platform.isAArch64() so we can distinguish between the Oracle arm64 port and the open Aarch64 port. I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment. thanks, Chris On 1/9/17 10:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172144 > > Needs a sponsor because it enables the test. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8172144/ > > Andrew. From bob.vandette at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 20:14:45 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:14:45 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <4E700D62-8D04-47F7-9298-D1ED776BE376@oracle.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <642003bd-a5dc-d1ae-87ff-aca50388cb9c@redhat.com> <4E700D62-8D04-47F7-9298-D1ED776BE376@oracle.com> Message-ID: I checked with the hotspot compiler team and their manager and they are ok with using the labels ?arm64? and ?aarch64? to mark bugs that are specific to 64-bit aarch64 builds that are done using hotspot/src/cpu/arm versus hotspot/src/cpu/aarch64 sources. Please publicize this label?s use throughout interested OpenJDK developers. Bob. > On Mar 16, 2017, at 2:40 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: > > >> On Mar 16, 2017, at 2:27 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 16/03/17 18:03, Bob Vandette wrote: >> >>> I agree that this is an issue but I?m not sure that it?s a show >>> stopper. >>> >>> The Oracle build will not have OpenJDK in the version string which >>> will help to differentiate our binaries from OpenJDK builds. >> >> Right, like I said. >> >>> The bug database field that I think you are describing is only an >>> indication of the architecture that a bug can be reproduced on. It >>> is not meant to describe the sources that were used to produce the >>> binaries or where the binaries came from. That should to be >>> specified elsewhere in the bug report. >> >> OK. I would surely have tried to insist that the version strings were >> different for our two ports at the time your port was committed, but I >> blew my chance. >> >>> I don?t like the idea of listing arm64 in the version string since >>> we are only using arm64 internally to trigger the use of the hotspot >>> ?arm? directory. We?d also end up with lots of incorrect bug >>> entries since folks will fail to use arm64 to report a bug in the >>> Oracle 64-bit ARM port running on an aarch64 based system. >>> >>> If we start putting build configuration information in the version >>> string, then where do we stop. >> >> It's going to be rather horrible, though. How do we reproduce a bug >> if we don't know what port is causing the bug? How do we even ask the >> question if we don't know what the ports are called? I always assumed >> we were "aarch64" and you were "arm64". How are we to ask a user if >> we can't tell them what to look for? >> >> Even if we don't change anything in OpenJDK itself, we'll still have >> to agree on a label to use in the bug database. I don't know what >> labels we should use, but we should agree on them now. Do you have >> any preferences? > > I agree that a label would be very useful. For this purpose, I?m not opposed > to using the arm64 versus aarch64 names. Let me check around to see > if anyone has a better suggestion. > > Bob. > > > >> >> Andrew. > From bob.vandette at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 20:15:51 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:15:51 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> Message-ID: <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> I don?t think we need a better check. We shouldn?t have tests that are enabled that don?t run on both implementations. Bob. > On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > This change has inadvertently enabled the test for the Oracle arm64 port, which is now failing occasionally. I filed JDK-8177055. We need a better check than Platform.isAArch64() so we can distinguish between the Oracle arm64 port and the open Aarch64 port. I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment. > > thanks, > > Chris > > On 1/9/17 10:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172144 >> >> Needs a sponsor because it enables the test. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8172144/ >> >> Andrew. > > From chris.plummer at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 20:37:14 2017 From: chris.plummer at oracle.com (Chris Plummer) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:37:14 -0700 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> Message-ID: <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> I'm not sure why you would say that. I would assume that this is an important test for testing the Reserved Stack Area. Not running it on a supported platform would leaving a testing gap IMHO. Chris On 3/17/17 1:15 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: > I don?t think we need a better check. We shouldn?t have tests that are enabled that don?t run on both > implementations. > > Bob. > >> On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: >> >> Hi Andrew, >> >> This change has inadvertently enabled the test for the Oracle arm64 port, which is now failing occasionally. I filed JDK-8177055. We need a better check than Platform.isAArch64() so we can distinguish between the Oracle arm64 port and the open Aarch64 port. I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment. >> >> thanks, >> >> Chris >> >> On 1/9/17 10:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172144 >>> >>> Needs a sponsor because it enables the test. >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8172144/ >>> >>> Andrew. >> From bob.vandette at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 21:01:08 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 17:01:08 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> Message-ID: <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> I?m just saying that the test should run on both the Oracle 64-bit ARM port as well as the aarch64 port and shouldn?t be excluded on one or the other implementations. Bob. > On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: > > I'm not sure why you would say that. I would assume that this is an important test for testing the Reserved Stack Area. Not running it on a supported platform would leaving a testing gap IMHO. > > Chris > > On 3/17/17 1:15 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: >> I don?t think we need a better check. We shouldn?t have tests that are enabled that don?t run on both >> implementations. >> >> Bob. >> >>> On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: >>> >>> Hi Andrew, >>> >>> This change has inadvertently enabled the test for the Oracle arm64 port, which is now failing occasionally. I filed JDK-8177055. We need a better check than Platform.isAArch64() so we can distinguish between the Oracle arm64 port and the open Aarch64 port. I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment. >>> >>> thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> On 1/9/17 10:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172144 >>>> >>>> Needs a sponsor because it enables the test. >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8172144/ >>>> >>>> Andrew. >>> > > From chris.plummer at oracle.com Fri Mar 17 21:09:24 2017 From: chris.plummer at oracle.com (Chris Plummer) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:09:24 -0700 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> Message-ID: <17f1d6cc-db0a-f95a-041f-5d9d603f354a@oracle.com> So how then do you test a feature that is in one port and not the other if the test can't determine if the feature is present? All it can do is detect if something went wrong with the testing, but it does not know if the failure is due to a bug or if due to the feature not being present. Chris On 3/17/17 2:01 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: > I?m just saying that the test should run on both the Oracle 64-bit ARM port as well as the aarch64 port and shouldn?t > be excluded on one or the other implementations. > > Bob. > >> On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:37 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: >> >> I'm not sure why you would say that. I would assume that this is an important test for testing the Reserved Stack Area. Not running it on a supported platform would leaving a testing gap IMHO. >> >> Chris >> >> On 3/17/17 1:15 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: >>> I don?t think we need a better check. We shouldn?t have tests that are enabled that don?t run on both >>> implementations. >>> >>> Bob. >>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Andrew, >>>> >>>> This change has inadvertently enabled the test for the Oracle arm64 port, which is now failing occasionally. I filed JDK-8177055. We need a better check than Platform.isAArch64() so we can distinguish between the Oracle arm64 port and the open Aarch64 port. I'm not sure what the answer is at the moment. >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> On 1/9/17 10:04 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8172144 >>>>> >>>>> Needs a sponsor because it enables the test. >>>>> >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aph/8172144/ >>>>> >>>>> Andrew. >> From Derek.White at cavium.com Fri Mar 17 22:20:30 2017 From: Derek.White at cavium.com (White, Derek) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 22:20:30 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK builds fails on AARCH64 with Ubuntu 1604 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Andrew, I didn't see a code change here. Did the compiler change on Jenkins? Can you report the gcc version used? Could also be change in compiler warning maybe-uninitialized (but I couldn't find one). For reference, within this function we have C++ code: ... bool need_mem_bar; switch (kind) { case Relaxed: need_mem_bar = mismatched || can_access_non_heap; break; case Opaque: // Opaque uses CPUOrder membars for protection against code movement. case Acquire: case Release: case Volatile: need_mem_bar = true; break; default: ShouldNotReachHere(); // I thought this was a "noreturn" function, but it's not... } ... if (need_mem_bar) insert_mem_bar(Op_MemBarCPUOrder); - Derek From: Pinski, Andrew Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 5:36 PM To: aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net Cc: White, Derek Subject: OpenJDK builds fails on AARCH64 with Ubuntu 1604 Hi, The current build of OpenJDK v9 fails on aarch64-linux-gnu. I don't know who else to write this to so I thought this is the correct place to report build failures. This started to fail on March 15, 2017. Thanks, Andrew Pinski Log: /home/jenkins/workspace/BuildOpenJDK/hs/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/library_call.cpp: In member function 'bool LibraryCallKit::inline_unsafe_access(bool, BasicType, LibraryCallKit::AccessKind, bool)': /home/jenkins/workspace/BuildOpenJDK/hs/hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/library_call.cpp:2577:3: error: 'need_mem_bar' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized] if (need_mem_bar) insert_mem_bar(Op_MemBarCPUOrder); ^ Creating support/modules_libs/java.base/jrt-fs.jar Note: /home/jenkins/workspace/BuildOpenJDK/hs/corba/src/java.corba/share/classes/com/sun/tools/corba/se/idl/som/idlemit/MetaPragma.java uses or overrides a deprecated API. Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details. Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe operations. Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details. cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors lib/CompileJvm.gmk:201: recipe for target '/home/jenkins/workspace/BuildOpenJDK/hs/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/hotspot/variant-server/libjvm/objs/library_call.o' failed make[3]: *** [/home/jenkins/workspace/BuildOpenJDK/hs/build/linux-aarch64-normal-server-release/hotspot/variant-server/libjvm/objs/library_call.o] Error 1 make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... From aph at redhat.com Sat Mar 18 08:15:36 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:15:36 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5ad0b11f-cef2-14b9-931a-ee082602a291@redhat.com> On 17/03/17 21:01, Bob Vandette wrote: > I?m just saying that the test should run on both the Oracle 64-bit > ARM port as well as the aarch64 port and shouldn?t be excluded on > one or the other implementations. But you haven't explained why you believe this. It's not practical to keep both implementations in lock-step with regard to features. At least, not without hobbling one of them, which I would find totally unacceptable. And we don't want tests enabled on platforms which don't support a feature under test, do we? Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Sat Mar 18 08:25:45 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 08:25:45 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK builds fails on AARCH64 with Ubuntu 1604 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3ecb1269-6a55-1a7c-4493-0a57359fabbf@redhat.com> On 17/03/17 22:20, White, Derek wrote: > I didn't see a code change here. Did the compiler change on Jenkins? > Can you report the gcc version used? > > Could also be change in compiler warning maybe-uninitialized (but I > couldn't find one). We had to fix a few of these before. I added code like this: static jlong as_long(LIR_Opr data) { jlong result; switch (data->type()) { case T_INT: result = (data->as_jint()); break; case T_LONG: result = (data->as_jlong()); break; default: ShouldNotReachHere(); result = 0; // unreachable } return result; } I hate having to do this. We can't tell GCC that ShouldNotReachHere is noreturn because then it doesn't generate backtrace information, and we need that for debugging. Andrew. From bob.vandette at oracle.com Sat Mar 18 14:24:26 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 10:24:26 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8172144: AArch64: Implement "JEP 270: Reserved Stack Areas for Critical Sections" In-Reply-To: <5ad0b11f-cef2-14b9-931a-ee082602a291@redhat.com> References: <20fc8f92-9ea0-e853-a53c-b03d0c0f0beb@redhat.com> <560844FB-FA4B-4A74-B6AE-25B43CA3083F@oracle.com> <7e43470c-fe5c-a83d-56c4-40d0577455ff@oracle.com> <62DF905C-11FC-4375-B16B-459E5942A181@oracle.com> <5ad0b11f-cef2-14b9-931a-ee082602a291@redhat.com> Message-ID: The way we currently exclude tests in jtreg is to use @requires and provide specific os names or architectures. I really don?t want to have 2 different os.arch names for the two 64-bit arm ports. This would cause issues for developers switching off of the os.arch names. So unless we extend jtreg (which we could do at some point) to provide additional variables to test for, then we need to stick with the variables that exist. It perfectly acceptable for a test to be written in such a way as to verify that a feature exists and return success when the feature is not available. That doesn?t appear to be the case in the webrev that you posted. ps. This is just my .02, I?m not the grand Poobah for these types of issues. Bob. > On Mar 18, 2017, at 4:15 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 17/03/17 21:01, Bob Vandette wrote: >> I?m just saying that the test should run on both the Oracle 64-bit >> ARM port as well as the aarch64 port and shouldn?t be excluded on >> one or the other implementations. > > But you haven't explained why you believe this. It's not practical to > keep both implementations in lock-step with regard to features. At > least, not without hobbling one of them, which I would find totally > unacceptable. And we don't want tests enabled on platforms which > don't support a feature under test, do we? > > Andrew. From ci_notify at linaro.org Sat Mar 18 16:13:01 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:13:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <744269097.1479.1489853581684.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/076/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 5; error: 8 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,292; fail: 620; error: 29 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,827; fail: 2; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 1,364; fail: 7; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 7,258; fail: 613; error: 50 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/jan/31 pass: 3,830; fail: 1; error: 7 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 6: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.01x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.75x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 70.93, Server: 106.93 Client 70.93 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.65x Server 106.93 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.51x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-02 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/031/results/ 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From ningsheng.jian at linaro.org Mon Mar 20 02:07:04 2017 From: ningsheng.jian at linaro.org (Ningsheng Jian) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:07:04 +0800 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK builds fails on AARCH64 with Ubuntu 1604 In-Reply-To: <3ecb1269-6a55-1a7c-4493-0a57359fabbf@redhat.com> References: <3ecb1269-6a55-1a7c-4493-0a57359fabbf@redhat.com> Message-ID: We also got this build failure on hs tree. It is apparently not aarch64 only. Maybe we should initialize need_mem_bar first. Just curious why gcc did not complain before Roland's change of that line of code. Thanks, Ningsheng On 18 March 2017 at 16:25, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 17/03/17 22:20, White, Derek wrote: > >> I didn't see a code change here. Did the compiler change on Jenkins? >> Can you report the gcc version used? >> >> Could also be change in compiler warning maybe-uninitialized (but I >> couldn't find one). > > We had to fix a few of these before. I added code like this: > > static jlong as_long(LIR_Opr data) { > jlong result; > switch (data->type()) { > case T_INT: > result = (data->as_jint()); > break; > case T_LONG: > result = (data->as_jlong()); > break; > default: > ShouldNotReachHere(); > result = 0; // unreachable > } > return result; > } > > I hate having to do this. We can't tell GCC that ShouldNotReachHere > is noreturn because then it doesn't generate backtrace information, > and we need that for debugging. > > Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 20 08:37:06 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 08:37:06 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] OpenJDK builds fails on AARCH64 with Ubuntu 1604 In-Reply-To: References: <3ecb1269-6a55-1a7c-4493-0a57359fabbf@redhat.com> Message-ID: <793b8fab-be7c-2092-09b9-74e6d85ce714@redhat.com> On 20/03/17 02:07, Ningsheng Jian wrote: > We also got this build failure on hs tree. It is apparently not > aarch64 only. Maybe we should initialize need_mem_bar first. No, please follow this pattern: >> default: >> ShouldNotReachHere(); >> result = 0; // unreachable >> } >> return result; >> } We do it this way because it needs to be clear to the reader that this is dead code, only inserted to shut up the compiler. Andrew. From stuart.monteith at linaro.org Mon Mar 20 11:25:29 2017 From: stuart.monteith at linaro.org (Stuart Monteith) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:25:29 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] Fireside chat - Thursday Message-ID: <7b60abdc-7704-60d5-0174-67c10144a24f@linaro.org> Hello, I has been a long time since our last fireside chat, so I'm proposing we have one this Thursday. This week we'll be having a fireside chat on Thursday at 1600 UTC, 1600 GMT, 1200 EDT, 0900 PDT. In order to join in, please join the chat at Bluejeans here: https://bluejeans.com/791239268 Alternatively you may dial in using one of the following numbers http://bluejeans.com/numbers and enter the Meeting ID: 791239268 Please do not use any of the 'freefone' numbers, because although they may be free for you they cost us $$$$. Best Regards, Stuart From ci_notify at linaro.org Mon Mar 20 16:58:23 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:58:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <314762294.1707.1490029103930.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/078/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,359; fail: 11; error: 7 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,278; fail: 643; error: 23 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,253; fail: 727; error: 24 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,825; fail: 6; error: 10 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,878; error: 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 1,358; fail: 13; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 7,293; fail: 626; error: 25 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,261; fail: 723; error: 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/01 pass: 3,826; fail: 6; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 5: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.00x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.87x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.38, Server: 104.56 Client 72.38 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.68x Server 104.56 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.47x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-03 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/032/results/ 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ 2017-03-20 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/078/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From Derek.White at cavium.com Mon Mar 20 21:56:53 2017 From: Derek.White at cavium.com (White, Derek) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 21:56:53 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] AArch64 register usage questions Message-ID: Hi, I've been looking at the aarch64 port's register usage, and compared against Oracle's arm port, and have a few questions and observations: Comparing the enum in c1_defs_aarch54.hpp vs. the enum in the arm code (and doing some constant folding by hand), you get: ARM32/64 AArch64 Notes pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map 33 32 number of registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_cpu_regs_frame_map 27 17 number of registers killed by calls pd_nof_cpu_regs_reg_alloc 27 17 number of registers that are visible to register allocator () pd_nof_cpu_regs_linearscan 33 32 number of registers visible to linear scan pd_nof_cpu_regs_processed_in_linearscan 28 -0 number of registers processed in linear scan; includes LR (in arm prt) pd_first_cpu_reg 0 0 pd_last_cpu_reg 32 16 pd_first_callee_saved_reg -0 17 pd_last_callee_saved_reg -0 24 pd_last_allocatable_cpu_reg -0 16 pd_first_byte_reg -0 0 unused! pd_last_byte_reg -0 16 unused, except by unused last_byte_reg(). pd_nof_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 number of float registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 number of float registers killed by calls pd_nof_fpu_regs_reg_alloc 32 8 number of float registers that are visible to register allocator pd_nof_fpu_regs_linearscan 32 32 number of float registers visible to linear scan pd_first_fpu_reg 33 32 '= pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map, pd_last_fpu_reg 64 63 pd_first_callee_saved_fpu_reg -0 40 pd_last_callee_saved_fpu_reg -0 47 pd_nof_xmm_regs_linearscan 0 0 pd_nof_caller_save_xmm_regs 0 -0 pd_first_xmm_reg -1 -0 pd_last_xmm_reg -1 -0 I don't expect these values to match, but some items stand out: - AArch64 has fewer caller-saves registers, but more callee-saves registers defined above. o But the Aarch64 code has comments like: // FIXME: There are no callee-saved. o And C2 does not define any SOE registers. o Is C1 using few registers than it could? Than it should? o And/or is C2? o There are other comments, such as above generate_call_stub(), that says: ? // we don't need to save r16-18 because Java does not use them ? The comment says r16, but doesn't seem to match pd_first_callee_saved_reg. ? I don't see where r18 came from. - pd_first_byte_reg, pd_last_byte_reg and last_byte_reg() seem unused. Looking at the register definitions in aarch64.ad and other places: - Aarch64 always allocates r27 to use for compressed oops (rheapbase). Arm32/64 only allocates the register if CompressedOops is enabled. o In one sense the Aarch64 approach seems reasonable. I think the default setting for CompressedOops will be true until heap sizes get huge (e.g. somewhere past 256GB.), so there may not be much reason to optimize the non-CompressedOops path. o If we really wanted to use r27 for compiled code, we could probably only allocate r27 for rheapbase if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() != NULL). Thanks for any thoughts you might have... - Derek From Derek.White at cavium.com Mon Mar 20 22:39:43 2017 From: Derek.White at cavium.com (White, Derek) Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 22:39:43 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] AArch64 register usage questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry, mailing list ate my formatting. This table should be readable in fix-width font: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORACLE OPENJDK pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map 33 32 # number of registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_cpu_regs_frame_map 27 17 # number of registers killed by calls pd_nof_cpu_regs_reg_alloc 27 17 # number of registers that are visible to register allocator () pd_nof_cpu_regs_linearscan 33 32 # number of registers visible to linear scan pd_nof_cpu_regs_processed_in_linearscan 28 - # number of registers processed in linear scan; includes LR (in arm prt) pd_first_cpu_reg 0 0 pd_last_cpu_reg 32 16 pd_first_callee_saved_reg - 17 pd_last_callee_saved_reg - 24 pd_last_allocatable_cpu_reg - 16 pd_first_byte_reg - 0 # unused! pd_last_byte_reg - 16 # unused, except by unused last_byte_reg(). pd_nof_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 # number of float registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 # number of float registers killed by calls pd_nof_fpu_regs_reg_alloc 32 8 # number of float registers that are visible to register allocator pd_nof_fpu_regs_linearscan 32 32 # number of float registers visible to linear scan pd_first_fpu_reg 33 32 = pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map, pd_last_fpu_reg 64 63 pd_first_callee_saved_fpu_reg - 40 pd_last_callee_saved_fpu_reg - 47 pd_nof_xmm_regs_linearscan 0 0 pd_nof_caller_save_xmm_regs 0 - pd_first_xmm_reg -1 - pd_last_xmm_reg -1 - --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't expect these values to match, but some items stand out: - AArch64 has fewer caller-saves registers, but more callee-saves registers defined above. - But the Aarch64 code has comments like: // FIXME: There are no callee-saved. - And C2 does not define any SOE registers. - Is C1 using few registers than it could? Than it should? - And/or is C2? - There are other comments, such as above generate_call_stub(), that says: - // we don't need to save r16-18 because Java does not use them - The comment says r16, but doesn't seem to match pd_first_callee_saved_reg. - I don't see where r18 came from. - pd_first_byte_reg, pd_last_byte_reg and last_byte_reg() seem unused. Looking at the register definitions in aarch64.ad and other places: - Aarch64 always allocates r27 to use for compressed oops (rheapbase). Arm32/64 only allocates the register if CompressedOops is enabled. - In one sense the Aarch64 approach seems reasonable. I think the default setting for CompressedOops will be true until heap sizes get huge (e.g. somewhere past 256GB.), so there may not be much reason to optimize the non-CompressedOops path. - If we really wanted to use r27 for compiled code, we could probably only allocate r27 for rheapbase if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() != NULL). Thanks for any thoughts you might have... - Derek -----Original Message----- From: aarch64-port-dev [mailto:aarch64-port-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of White, Derek Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 5:57 PM To: aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] AArch64 register usage questions Hi, I've been looking at the aarch64 port's register usage, and compared against Oracle's arm port, and have a few questions and observations: Comparing the enum in c1_defs_aarch54.hpp vs. the enum in the arm code (and doing some constant folding by hand), you get: ARM32/64 AArch64 Notes pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map 33 32 number of registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_cpu_regs_frame_map 27 17 number of registers killed by calls pd_nof_cpu_regs_reg_alloc 27 17 number of registers that are visible to register allocator () pd_nof_cpu_regs_linearscan 33 32 number of registers visible to linear scan pd_nof_cpu_regs_processed_in_linearscan 28 -0 number of registers processed in linear scan; includes LR (in arm prt) pd_first_cpu_reg 0 0 pd_last_cpu_reg 32 16 pd_first_callee_saved_reg -0 17 pd_last_callee_saved_reg -0 24 pd_last_allocatable_cpu_reg -0 16 pd_first_byte_reg -0 0 unused! pd_last_byte_reg -0 16 unused, except by unused last_byte_reg(). pd_nof_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 number of float registers used during code emission pd_nof_caller_save_fpu_regs_frame_map 32 32 number of float registers killed by calls pd_nof_fpu_regs_reg_alloc 32 8 number of float registers that are visible to register allocator pd_nof_fpu_regs_linearscan 32 32 number of float registers visible to linear scan pd_first_fpu_reg 33 32 '= pd_nof_cpu_regs_frame_map, pd_last_fpu_reg 64 63 pd_first_callee_saved_fpu_reg -0 40 pd_last_callee_saved_fpu_reg -0 47 pd_nof_xmm_regs_linearscan 0 0 pd_nof_caller_save_xmm_regs 0 -0 pd_first_xmm_reg -1 -0 pd_last_xmm_reg -1 -0 I don't expect these values to match, but some items stand out: - AArch64 has fewer caller-saves registers, but more callee-saves registers defined above. o But the Aarch64 code has comments like: // FIXME: There are no callee-saved. o And C2 does not define any SOE registers. o Is C1 using few registers than it could? Than it should? o And/or is C2? o There are other comments, such as above generate_call_stub(), that says: ? // we don't need to save r16-18 because Java does not use them ? The comment says r16, but doesn't seem to match pd_first_callee_saved_reg. ? I don't see where r18 came from. - pd_first_byte_reg, pd_last_byte_reg and last_byte_reg() seem unused. Looking at the register definitions in aarch64.ad and other places: - Aarch64 always allocates r27 to use for compressed oops (rheapbase). Arm32/64 only allocates the register if CompressedOops is enabled. o In one sense the Aarch64 approach seems reasonable. I think the default setting for CompressedOops will be true until heap sizes get huge (e.g. somewhere past 256GB.), so there may not be much reason to optimize the non-CompressedOops path. o If we really wanted to use r27 for compiled code, we could probably only allocate r27 for rheapbase if (Universe::narrow_oop_base() != NULL). Thanks for any thoughts you might have... - Derek From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 21 08:58:19 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:58:19 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] AArch64 register usage questions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16453624-8779-efd7-d7ed-f644d3d6f5a1@redhat.com> On 20/03/17 21:56, White, Derek wrote: > > I've been looking at the aarch64 port's register usage, and compared > against Oracle's arm port, and have a few questions and > observations: > > Comparing the enum in c1_defs_aarch54.hpp vs. the enum in the arm > code (and doing some constant folding by hand), you get: > > > I don't expect these values to match, but some items stand out: > > - AArch64 has fewer caller-saves registers, but more callee-saves > registers defined above. You have to distinguish between the Java calling convention and the C calling convention. Java saves everything, C only saves a subset. There's no point saving registers that are not callee-clobbered. > o But the Aarch64 code has comments like: // FIXME: There are no > callee-saved. That's right: there are none in the Java convention. Everything (except FP) gets clobbered on a call in the Java calling convention. > o And C2 does not define any SOE registers. > > o Is C1 using few registers than it could? Than it should? > > o And/or is C2? Just one: the frame pointer. It might also be that C1 doesn't use the compressed OOPs base, so we could use that. We haven't done much work optimizing C1 because it is C1: there is very little reward. > o There are other comments, such as above generate_call_stub(), that says: > > ? // we don't need to save r16-18 because Java does not use them Tha's not a correct comment. We don't need to save r16-18 because the APCS doesn't need us to. > ? The comment says r16, but doesn't seem to match pd_first_callee_saved_reg. r16 is not callee-saved, as inspection of the APCS will show. > ? I don't see where r18 came from. > > - pd_first_byte_reg, pd_last_byte_reg and last_byte_reg() seem unused. > > Looking at the register definitions in aarch64.ad and other places: > > > - Aarch64 always allocates r27 to use for compressed oops > (rheapbase). Arm32/64 only allocates the register if CompressedOops > is enabled. > > o In one sense the Aarch64 approach seems reasonable. I think the > default setting for CompressedOops will be true until heap sizes get > huge (e.g. somewhere past 256GB.), so there may not be much reason > to optimize the non-CompressedOops path. > > o If we really wanted to use r27 for compiled code, we could > probably only allocate r27 for rheapbase if > (Universe::narrow_oop_base() != NULL). That's correct. We should do that. We should also use FP: this would be advantageous because it's the only callee-saved register in the Java calling convention. Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 21 14:26:15 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 14:26:15 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> Message-ID: <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> On 16/03/17 18:03, Bob Vandette wrote: > If we start putting build configuration information in the version string, then where do we stop. Two separate ports is pretty large for a "build configuration issue". How about we define a unique global dynamic symbol? Then, at least, it's just a matter of using nm or equivalent to have a look at which port we have. Andrew. From bob.vandette at oracle.com Tue Mar 21 15:25:58 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 11:25:58 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> I?d prefer to use something like these System properties. "java.vendor" JRE vendor name "java.vendor.url" JRE vendor URL or to add something to the ?release? file. HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=arm or HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=aarch64 Bob. > On Mar 21, 2017, at 10:26 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 16/03/17 18:03, Bob Vandette wrote: >> If we start putting build configuration information in the version string, then where do we stop. > > Two separate ports is pretty large for a "build configuration issue". > > How about we define a unique global dynamic symbol? Then, at least, > it's just a matter of using nm or equivalent to have a look at which > port we have. > > Andrew. > From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 21 15:27:33 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:27:33 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> Message-ID: On 21/03/17 15:25, Bob Vandette wrote: > I?d prefer to use something like these System properties. > > "java.vendor" JRE vendor name > "java.vendor.url" JRE vendor URL > > or to add something to the ?release? file. > > HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=arm > > or > > HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=aarch64 OK, sounds good. I'll have a think. Andrew. From ci_notify at linaro.org Wed Mar 22 16:43:58 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 16:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1161921323.2124.1490201039299.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/080/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,358; fail: 10; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,294; fail: 622; error: 28 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,253; fail: 727; error: 24 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,294; fail: 689; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,815; fail: 17; error: 10 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,876; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 1,273; fail: 61; error: 9 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,394; fail: 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 7,282; fail: 641; error: 21 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,261; fail: 723; error: 20 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,271; fail: 712; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/02 pass: 3,834; error: 8 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,879; error: 2 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.00x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.82x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 70.93, Server: 110.27 Client 70.93 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.65x Server 110.27 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.55x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-05 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/033/results/ 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ 2017-03-20 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/078/results/ 2017-03-22 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/080/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From shade at redhat.com Wed Mar 22 16:47:55 2017 From: shade at redhat.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:47:55 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: <1161921323.2124.1490201039299.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> References: <1161921323.2124.1490201039299.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> Message-ID: <0cd37a9e-2f91-85e0-e822-8e95818ae17d@redhat.com> On 03/22/2017 05:43 PM, ci_notify at linaro.org wrote: > 2017-03-22 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/080/results/ I am confused about this result. The bug fix: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175887 ...went into jdk9/jdk9 a week ago. Surely it should have been caught in this run, and fixed acqrel tests? If not, are we looking at some other bug? -Aleksey From ningsheng.jian at linaro.org Thu Mar 23 09:32:34 2017 From: ningsheng.jian at linaro.org (Ningsheng Jian) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:32:34 +0800 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] SIGSEGV in aarch64 OpenJDK8u Message-ID: Hi, We got a SIGSEGV while building Apache Ambari and Apache BigTop using OpenJDK8u on AArch64 platform. The segfault happens while running Apache FindBugs. I have extracted the test packages and shared them at (with hs_err log): http://people.linaro.org/~ningsheng.jian/test/findbugs-test.tar.gz Just run test.sh to reproduce this issue. However, the test is large and I am not able to reduce it. This issue only happens on AArch64 OpenJDK8u, i.e. not on JDK9 or Oracle JDK8u. After some bisect work, I found that the failure exists since this patch: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/f9b6277551dc Reverting this patch makes the test passed. However the patch looks good to me (though it is OpenJDK8u only patch) and I don't think it is the direct cause for the issue. Could you please help to look at it and provide some hints or even a fix? log: ----- # A fatal error has been detected by the Java Runtime Environment: # # SIGSEGV (0xb) at pc=0x0000ffff95425f48, pid=8074, tid=0x0000ffff9c9d5200 # # JRE version: OpenJDK Runtime Environment (8.0_111-b14) (build 1.8.0_111-8u111-b14-2ubuntu0.16.04.2-b14) # Java VM: OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (25.111-b14 mixed mode linux-aarch64 compressed oops) # Problematic frame: # J 1399 C2 java.util.HashMap.putVal(ILjava/lang/Object;Ljava/lang/Object;ZZ)Ljava/lang/Object; (300 bytes) @ 0x0000ffff95425f48 [0x0000ffff95425e00+0x148] # # Core dump written. Default location: /mnt/share/homes/ninjia02/Work/findbugs-test/core or core.8074 # # An error report file with more information is saved as: # /mnt/share/homes/ninjia02/Work/findbugs-test/hs_err_pid8074.log # # If you would like to submit a bug report, please visit: # http://bugreport.java.com/bugreport/crash.jsp # ----- Thanks, Ningsheng From neugens at redhat.com Thu Mar 23 10:23:45 2017 From: neugens at redhat.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:23:45 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JDK-8177390: java -version does not differentiate between which port of AArch64 is used Message-ID: Hi all, [Sorry for cross posting to the aarch64 mailing list, please try to keep all replies to jdk9-dev] I have a proposed fix for JDK-8177390[1]. The whole issue can be seen in details on the aarch64-port-dev thread linked in the bug report[2], but to summarise, we now have two implementations for the aarch64, one is the "original" community contribution and the other is the Oracle version that landed recently in the repositories. The two versions can be build side by side, which is great since users can compare very easily the two implementations, have a feeling of the performances, study the differences in the implementations etc... however, once compiled there is no easy way to tell which one is which, unless you are using the downstream packaged versions, where the name of the JDK may offer a small hint. This is more than just an annoyance, though, it will make life extremely difficult for bug reporting and hunting, and the hotspot crash files may not help either, so we think this should be fixed asap (and the reason why I filed the bug report with a priority a bit higher than usual). It was suggested to play with one of the java.vendor strings to address this, so I'm proposing a patch to alter the java.vendor.url to point to either the usual java.oracle.com or to the aarg64 project page, depending on the choice of the port at compilation time: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8177390/webrev.1/ We would really like to have this patch in before the JDK9 is released, I understand that we need to seek guidance from project leads for that to happen at this stage of development. The patch was taken on the jdk9 client repository, I'm not sure if I will also need to push separately to 10 or if this will be an automatic forward port. Please, let me know what you think. Cheers, Mario [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177390 [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/aarch64-port-dev/2017-March/004319.html From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 23 11:24:59 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 11:24:59 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] SIGSEGV in aarch64 OpenJDK8u In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 23/03/17 09:32, Ningsheng Jian wrote: > Could you please help to look at it and provide some hints or even a fix? Thanks, I'm looking at it. Andrew. From rkennke at redhat.com Thu Mar 23 16:42:49 2017 From: rkennke at redhat.com (Roman Kennke) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:42:49 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Merge from Shenandoah JDK8u since 2017-03-09 Message-ID: <8e5e5afd-d780-1a16-e800-ad8dc6cda0a7@redhat.com> This merges all changesets from Shenandoah's jdk8u repository since 2017-03-09. It's all build fixes for i586 and Windows 64 builds. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/merge-2017-03-23/webrev.00/ I'll also tag it with aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 Ok? Roman From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 23 17:10:29 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:10:29 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: Merge from Shenandoah JDK8u since 2017-03-09 In-Reply-To: <8e5e5afd-d780-1a16-e800-ad8dc6cda0a7@redhat.com> References: <8e5e5afd-d780-1a16-e800-ad8dc6cda0a7@redhat.com> Message-ID: <60b96615-126a-aa19-75b4-591239a10f26@redhat.com> On 23/03/17 16:42, Roman Kennke wrote: > This merges all changesets from Shenandoah's jdk8u repository since > 2017-03-09. It's all build fixes for i586 and Windows 64 builds. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/merge-2017-03-23/webrev.00/ > > > I'll also tag it with > aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 > > Ok? This all looks reasonable. OK. Andrew. From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:23:16 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:23:16 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 Message-ID: <201703231723.v2NHNGth018609@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: a748c134e756 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 17:38 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/a748c134e756 Import from Shenandoah tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-09 ! make/excludeSrc.make ! make/windows/makefiles/vm.make ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/macroAssembler_aarch64.cpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/shenandoahBarrierSet_aarch64.cpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/stubGenerator_aarch64.cpp ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/stubRoutines_aarch64.hpp ! src/cpu/x86/vm/macroAssembler_x86.cpp ! src/cpu/x86/vm/sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp ! src/cpu/x86/vm/shenandoahBarrierSet_x86.cpp ! src/cpu/x86/vm/stubGenerator_x86_64.cpp ! src/cpu/x86/vm/stubRoutines_x86_64.hpp ! src/share/vm/asm/assembler.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shared/parallelCleaning.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/brooksPointer.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahBarrierSet.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahBarrierSet.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahCollectionSet.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahCollectorPolicy.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahCollectorPolicy.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahConcurrentMark.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahConcurrentMark.inline.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahConcurrentThread.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahFreeSet.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeap.inline.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegion.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegion.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegion.inline.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegionCounters.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegionSet.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHeapRegionSet.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahHumongous.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahMarkCompact.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahMonitoringSupport.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahPhaseTimes.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahTaskqueue.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoahWorkGroup.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoah_globals.cpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/shenandoah_globals.hpp ! src/share/vm/gc_implementation/shenandoah/vm_operations_shenandoah.cpp ! src/share/vm/opto/shenandoahSupport.cpp ! src/share/vm/runtime/arguments.cpp ! src/share/vm/runtime/init.cpp ! src/share/vm/runtime/stubRoutines.cpp ! src/share/vm/runtime/stubRoutines.hpp ! src/share/vm/services/shenandoahMemoryPool.cpp From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:24:21 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:24:21 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 2a4586827492 Message-ID: <201703231724.v2NHOLSn019319@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 31d874083b9e Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/rev/31d874083b9e Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 2a4586827492 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:24:32 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:24:32 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 78fc702ee864 Message-ID: <201703231724.v2NHOWTQ019408@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: ab6b2adf966a Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/corba/rev/ab6b2adf966a Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 78fc702ee864 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:24:45 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:24:45 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset a748c134e756 Message-ID: <201703231724.v2NHOjTc019474@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 6a46fc540f13 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/6a46fc540f13 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset a748c134e756 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:24:59 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:24:59 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset d956d399be10 Message-ID: <201703231724.v2NHOxdB019538@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: a3365db52dc1 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxp/rev/a3365db52dc1 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset d956d399be10 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:25:12 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:25:12 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset a48d6d02673e Message-ID: <201703231725.v2NHPCCS019650@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: a9ed394cc1da Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jaxws/rev/a9ed394cc1da Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset a48d6d02673e ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:25:25 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:25:25 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 2ea76a2b648c Message-ID: <201703231725.v2NHPPpS019711@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 0321e26a3765 Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/jdk/rev/0321e26a3765 Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 2ea76a2b648c ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:25:38 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:25:38 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset f1449eec62f8 Message-ID: <201703231725.v2NHPdEu019865@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 5d9a5e1d488f Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/langtools/rev/5d9a5e1d488f Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset f1449eec62f8 ! .hgtags From roman at kennke.org Thu Mar 23 17:25:51 2017 From: roman at kennke.org (roman at kennke.org) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:25:51 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn: Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 0ff6e0584b83 Message-ID: <201703231725.v2NHPpAT020000@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 09c4d60c5ebb Author: rkennke Date: 2017-03-23 18:23 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/nashorn/rev/09c4d60c5ebb Added tag aarch64-shenandoah-jdk8u121-b14-shenandoah-merge-2017-03-23 for changeset 0ff6e0584b83 ! .hgtags From bob.vandette at oracle.com Thu Mar 23 18:58:52 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 14:58:52 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> Message-ID: <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> What does your aarch64 build have as IMPLEMENTOR in it?s ?release? file. I wonder if we can use this difference for now? IMPLEMENTOR="Oracle Corporation? Bob. > On Mar 21, 2017, at 11:27 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 21/03/17 15:25, Bob Vandette wrote: >> I?d prefer to use something like these System properties. >> >> "java.vendor" JRE vendor name >> "java.vendor.url" JRE vendor URL >> >> or to add something to the ?release? file. >> >> HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=arm >> >> or >> >> HOTSPOT_ARCH_DIR=aarch64 > > OK, sounds good. I'll have a think. > > Andrew. > From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 23 19:05:33 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 19:05:33 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> Message-ID: On 23/03/17 18:58, Bob Vandette wrote: > What does your aarch64 build have as IMPLEMENTOR in it?s ?release? file. > I wonder if we can use this difference for now? > > IMPLEMENTOR="Oracle Corporation? At the moment, SOURCE=".:d660c00d91bf corba:ff8cb43c07c0 hotspot:9bfa2cceba90+ jaxp:8c9a2a24752b jaxws:92aa05eff5d1 jdk:a2d3b7f65c95 langtools:69e2e4d7136c nashorn:4a07ebdf8b45" IMPLEMENTOR="N/A" I don't know where that file comes from or even what it means. It would be OK, but what would we put there? "OpenJDK"? They're both supposed to be OpenJDK projects. Andrew. From bob.vandette at oracle.com Thu Mar 23 19:27:27 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 15:27:27 -0400 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> Message-ID: <96A77F56-4F35-449D-83EB-CE19FDEEF768@oracle.com> I?m not sure of the exact meaning of these variables but the logic that generates this file is in jdk9/make/ReleaseFile.gmk. I?ll look into the intended purpose. Perhaps the fact that you have N/A and our build is Oracle might be good enough. Bob. > On Mar 23, 2017, at 3:05 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 23/03/17 18:58, Bob Vandette wrote: >> What does your aarch64 build have as IMPLEMENTOR in it?s ?release? file. >> I wonder if we can use this difference for now? >> >> IMPLEMENTOR="Oracle Corporation? > > At the moment, > > SOURCE=".:d660c00d91bf corba:ff8cb43c07c0 hotspot:9bfa2cceba90+ jaxp:8c9a2a24752b jaxws:92aa05eff5d1 jdk:a2d3b7f65c95 langtools:69e2e4d7136c nashorn:4a07ebdf8b45" > IMPLEMENTOR="N/A" > > I don't know where that file comes from or even what it means. > It would be OK, but what would we put there? "OpenJDK"? They're > both supposed to be OpenJDK projects. > > Andrew. > From david.holmes at oracle.com Fri Mar 24 01:42:31 2017 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 11:42:31 +1000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: <96A77F56-4F35-449D-83EB-CE19FDEEF768@oracle.com> References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> <96A77F56-4F35-449D-83EB-CE19FDEEF768@oracle.com> Message-ID: This issue seems to be fragmenting, given that Mario has put out a RFR on jdk9-dev based on the VENDOR_URL! We can easily change -Xinternalversion output, which would also affect hs-err log file. David On 24/03/2017 5:27 AM, Bob Vandette wrote: > I?m not sure of the exact meaning of these variables but the logic that > generates this file is in jdk9/make/ReleaseFile.gmk. I?ll look into > the intended purpose. > > Perhaps the fact that you have N/A and our build is Oracle might be good enough. > > Bob. > > >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 3:05 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 23/03/17 18:58, Bob Vandette wrote: >>> What does your aarch64 build have as IMPLEMENTOR in it?s ?release? file. >>> I wonder if we can use this difference for now? >>> >>> IMPLEMENTOR="Oracle Corporation? >> >> At the moment, >> >> SOURCE=".:d660c00d91bf corba:ff8cb43c07c0 hotspot:9bfa2cceba90+ jaxp:8c9a2a24752b jaxws:92aa05eff5d1 jdk:a2d3b7f65c95 langtools:69e2e4d7136c nashorn:4a07ebdf8b45" >> IMPLEMENTOR="N/A" >> >> I don't know where that file comes from or even what it means. >> It would be OK, but what would we put there? "OpenJDK"? They're >> both supposed to be OpenJDK projects. >> >> Andrew. >> > From aph at redhat.com Fri Mar 24 08:07:17 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 08:07:17 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8168503 JEP 297: Unified arm32/arm64 Port In-Reply-To: References: <8BACE784-C921-4C0E-90E0-C7446859C367@oracle.com> <58421A35.5070706@oracle.com> <35F08BAA-BE09-4A63-A4AB-EA71F3FA808F@oracle.com> <84d6c7ff-cef6-c245-660a-7cb61074b1a4@oracle.com> <530D0083-BD1C-41CF-A782-42935ACCDCFB@oracle.com> <4082474e-c3bf-ec2b-99d6-dc8a995c16fe@redhat.com> <5f79ca1a-18a9-4f52-6332-205ffff2e1a0@redhat.com> <1FBB8985-1FE6-44E1-B338-7C6D49372D93@oracle.com> <595FE441-10E0-4AB6-B7EE-686132F2269C@oracle.com> <96A77F56-4F35-449D-83EB-CE19FDEEF768@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5eaabe83-75f0-221a-910e-b73954c4f250@redhat.com> On 24/03/17 01:42, David Holmes wrote: > This issue seems to be fragmenting, given that Mario has put out a RFR > on jdk9-dev based on the VENDOR_URL! > > We can easily change -Xinternalversion output, which would also affect > hs-err log file. It's not fragmenting at all: Mario's idea looks decent enough. I would love you to explain what to do with -Xinternalversion. That would be awesome. It'd be nice to have something that can easily be read programmatically. Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Fri Mar 24 14:41:07 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:41:07 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] SIGSEGV in aarch64 OpenJDK8u In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks for the test case. That was, as Sherlock Holmes tended to say, quite a three-pipe problem. Please try this patch and let me know. Andrew. diff --git a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad --- a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad +++ b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad @@ -15152,7 +15192,7 @@ %} instruct string_indexof(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, iRegI_R2 cnt2, - iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) + iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) %{ match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 cnt2))); effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, USE_KILL cnt2, @@ -15170,8 +15210,8 @@ %} instruct string_indexof_con(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, - immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, - iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) + immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, + iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) %{ match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 int_cnt2))); effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, From ci_notify at linaro.org Sun Mar 26 16:46:21 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 16:46:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <158324226.2740.1490546782313.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/084/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,224; fail: 715; error: 20 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,253; fail: 727; error: 24 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,294; fail: 689; error: 21 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,278; fail: 713; error: 23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,861 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,876; error: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,886; fail: 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 1,380; fail: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,394; fail: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,397; fail: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 7,223; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,261; fail: 723; error: 20 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,271; fail: 712; error: 21 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,284; fail: 708; error: 22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/21 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,879; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,885; error: 2 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.00x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.81x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 70.93, Server: 118.61 Client 70.93 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.65x Server 118.61 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.67x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-22 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/052/results/ 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ 2017-03-20 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/078/results/ 2017-03-22 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/080/results/ 2017-03-26 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/084/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From ningsheng.jian at linaro.org Mon Mar 27 03:05:24 2017 From: ningsheng.jian at linaro.org (Ningsheng Jian) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:05:24 +0800 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] SIGSEGV in aarch64 OpenJDK8u In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Aha, yes! It does fix the issue I met! Thanks a lot, Andrew! I was not able to find the misuse of registers around the crash code. Checking jdk9 source, this kind of misuse also exists on those string_indexof supports. Regards, Ningsheng On 24 March 2017 at 22:41, Andrew Haley wrote: > Thanks for the test case. > > That was, as Sherlock Holmes tended to say, quite a three-pipe problem. > Please try this patch and let me know. > > Andrew. > > > > diff --git a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad > --- a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad > +++ b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad > @@ -15152,7 +15192,7 @@ > %} > > instruct string_indexof(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, iRegI_R2 cnt2, > - iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) > + iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) > %{ > match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 cnt2))); > effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, USE_KILL cnt2, > @@ -15170,8 +15210,8 @@ > %} > > instruct string_indexof_con(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, > - immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, > - iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) > + immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, > + iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) > %{ > match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 int_cnt2))); > effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, From adinn at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 10:53:58 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:53:58 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption Message-ID: Could someone please review this critical JDK9 patch for AArch64: Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177661 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8177661/webrev This corrects erroneous C2 register allocations from VM-dedicated registers like rthread rfp etc that resulted from mistyped AD rule inputs -- as reported in this aarch64-port-dev thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/aarch64-port-dev/2017-March/004347.html regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 14:52:59 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:52:59 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 27/03/17 11:53, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177661 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8177661/webrev That looks good. Please also look at a JDK8 backport; not urgent, but we should get it in before the next security release. Thanks, Andrew. From adinn at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 15:20:26 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:20:26 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> On 27/03/17 15:52, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 27/03/17 11:53, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177661 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8177661/webrev > > That looks good. Thanks. Could another reviewer please look at this? Also, what do I need by way of clearance to get this included into JDK9? It really needs to go in before first release because when it hits (which it surely will on some production system) it results in a show-stopper crash. > Please also look at a JDK8 backport; not urgent, but we should > get it in before the next security release. Sure, I'll propose it for backport as soon I get it into 9+10. regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 15:23:19 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 16:23:19 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> Message-ID: On 27/03/17 16:20, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Also, what do I need by way of clearance to get this included into JDK9? > It really needs to go in before first release because when it hits > (which it surely will on some production system) it results in a > show-stopper crash. I've asked Vladimir. Andrew. From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Mar 27 15:43:12 2017 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:43:12 -0700 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> Message-ID: <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> I am fine with this fix in JDK 9 but you need to update bug according to RDP2 process: - set Fix version to 9 - add label "jdk9-fix-request" - add Comment with "Fix Request" which explains importance of fix. See example in: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8177095 Vladimir On 3/27/17 8:23 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 27/03/17 16:20, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> Also, what do I need by way of clearance to get this included into JDK9? >> It really needs to go in before first release because when it hits >> (which it surely will on some production system) it results in a >> show-stopper crash. > > I've asked Vladimir. > > Andrew. > From adinn at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 16:19:32 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:19:32 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Vladimir, On 27/03/17 16:43, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > I am fine with this fix in JDK 9 but you need to update bug according to > RDP2 process: > > - set Fix version to 9 > - add label "jdk9-fix-request" > - add Comment with "Fix Request" which explains importance of fix. Thanks for the review and advice over process. The issue has been updated as requested. A new webrev (with updated reviewers tag) is here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8177661/webrev.02 regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Mar 27 16:38:09 2017 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:38:09 -0700 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> Message-ID: Fix is approved. You can push it yourself now since it is aarch64 specific. Regards, Vladimir On 3/27/17 9:19 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > On 27/03/17 16:43, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> I am fine with this fix in JDK 9 but you need to update bug according to >> RDP2 process: >> >> - set Fix version to 9 >> - add label "jdk9-fix-request" >> - add Comment with "Fix Request" which explains importance of fix. > > Thanks for the review and advice over process. The issue has been > updated as requested. A new webrev (with updated reviewers tag) is here: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8177661/webrev.02 > > regards, > > > Andrew Dinn > ----------- > Senior Principal Software Engineer > Red Hat UK Ltd > Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 > Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander > From adinn at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 16:42:20 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 17:42:20 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8a743a5d-e8ac-2517-df52-3bcd05cb35ca@redhat.com> Hi Vladimir, On 27/03/17 17:38, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Fix is approved. You can push it yourself now since it is aarch64 specific. Pushed. Many thanks for the speedy turnaround! regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 17:09:47 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:09:47 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <8a743a5d-e8ac-2517-df52-3bcd05cb35ca@redhat.com> References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> <8a743a5d-e8ac-2517-df52-3bcd05cb35ca@redhat.com> Message-ID: On 27/03/17 17:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > On 27/03/17 17:38, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Fix is approved. You can push it yourself now since it is aarch64 specific. > > Pushed. Many thanks for the speedy turnaround! Pushed where? I'm looking at http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/ Andrew. From shade at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 17:10:53 2017 From: shade at redhat.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 19:10:53 +0200 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> <8a743a5d-e8ac-2517-df52-3bcd05cb35ca@redhat.com> Message-ID: <2babeb38-1613-aecd-8396-ebc0fe28fa36@redhat.com> On 03/27/2017 07:09 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 27/03/17 17:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: >> Hi Vladimir, >> >> On 27/03/17 17:38, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>> Fix is approved. You can push it yourself now since it is aarch64 specific. >> >> Pushed. Many thanks for the speedy turnaround! > > Pushed where? I'm looking at http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/ We push to jdk9/dev, right? http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/983fe2075557 -Aleksey From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 17:12:30 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:12:30 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <2babeb38-1613-aecd-8396-ebc0fe28fa36@redhat.com> References: <9acfcf26-c511-255f-f7e4-dbe3711c22b3@redhat.com> <7fe176d4-5d37-7f42-ce85-8ceae103f11e@oracle.com> <8a743a5d-e8ac-2517-df52-3bcd05cb35ca@redhat.com> <2babeb38-1613-aecd-8396-ebc0fe28fa36@redhat.com> Message-ID: <9876e53a-2639-2a64-ec96-fcc61b56df50@redhat.com> On 27/03/17 18:10, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > On 03/27/2017 07:09 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 27/03/17 17:42, Andrew Dinn wrote: >>> Hi Vladimir, >>> >>> On 27/03/17 17:38, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>>> Fix is approved. You can push it yourself now since it is aarch64 specific. >>> >>> Pushed. Many thanks for the speedy turnaround! >> >> Pushed where? I'm looking at http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/ > > We push to jdk9/dev, right? > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/983fe2075557 Ah, sorry. Thanks! Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Mon Mar 27 17:14:37 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:14:37 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] SIGSEGV in aarch64 OpenJDK8u In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9df40223-9231-20f0-9a84-d79b95ccc562@redhat.com> On 27/03/17 04:05, Ningsheng Jian wrote: > Aha, yes! It does fix the issue I met! Thanks a lot, Andrew! > > I was not able to find the misuse of registers around the crash code. > > Checking jdk9 source, this kind of misuse also exists on those > string_indexof supports. Fixed as http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/983fe2075557 Thank you very much for finding this bug and producing the test case. You have averted what would have been a very nasty bug from being in the JDK9 release. JDK8 patch will follow. Andrew. From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 09:16:10 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 10:16:10 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] Notations and reliability Message-ID: <1f8b11bd-f5bf-89e2-e22d-2266382fd46c@redhat.com> We've come a cropper a couple of times because of poorly-chosen notations. Several times we've had a confusion between iRegI and iRegINoSp, which causes very obscure crashes. Also, a little while ago I found several bugs (all mine) caused by getting mixed up between e.g. strw and str. I now believe that I made a mistake when I assumed that Xwords (i.e. 64 bits) were in some way the "default" size on AArch64 and omitted the X suffix on them. In hindsight, it is much better for every operation to have a size associated with it, so the programmer would be forced to choose which one to use, and state it explicitly. This is how the "standard" assembly language works, and it is better than what we do. [Interestingly, the Oracle-authored AArch64 port made exactly the same (poor, IMO) choice. Perhaps programmers' brains are isomorphic.] With regard to register classes, GCC uses "GENERAL_REGS" as the name of the register class that can be allocated as a general-purpose operands, with "ALL_REGS" for everything. It would be better we did something similar. Andrew. From adinn at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 10:28:52 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:28:52 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] Notations and reliability In-Reply-To: <1f8b11bd-f5bf-89e2-e22d-2266382fd46c@redhat.com> References: <1f8b11bd-f5bf-89e2-e22d-2266382fd46c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <3c74099f-cd90-5628-e29c-102d68470f2a@redhat.com> On 28/03/17 10:16, Andrew Haley wrote: > We've come a cropper a couple of times because of poorly-chosen > notations. Several times we've had a confusion between iRegI and > iRegINoSp, which causes very obscure crashes. Also, a little while > ago I found several bugs (all mine) caused by getting mixed up between > e.g. strw and str. > > I now believe that I made a mistake when I assumed that Xwords > (i.e. 64 bits) were in some way the "default" size on AArch64 and > omitted the X suffix on them. In hindsight, it is much better for > every operation to have a size associated with it, so the programmer > would be forced to choose which one to use, and state it explicitly. > This is how the "standard" assembly language works, and it is better > than what we do. > > [Interestingly, the Oracle-authored AArch64 port made exactly the > same (poor, IMO) choice. Perhaps programmers' brains are isomorphic.] > > With regard to register classes, GCC uses "GENERAL_REGS" as the name > of the register class that can be allocated as a general-purpose > operands, with "ALL_REGS" for everything. It would be better we did > something similar. We do actually have quite clear names for the register /classes/ much as per x86. The names giving rise to the confusion are those employed in the /operand/ definitions. Note that unlike the register classes these all come in multiple flavours -- I, L,P, N etc -- according to the type of value that will be found in the register. I don't think our names are actually that much more opaque than x86. For example, it has rRegI rRegP any_RegP no_rax_rdx_RegL ... It's not actually very clear what is the difference between rRegP and any_RegP until you refer back to the register classes. The last name cited above makes it plain that you cannot match 2 specific registers but it is not really clear why. Also, if we used something like that in AArch64 where there are more 'special' registers which we might potentially want to exclude then it wouldn't really scale. I believe that we actually only have 3 operand names that are potentially subject to confusion. There are these two operand groups (by groups I mean they exist in multiple flavours of X, one for each of the available value type labels, I, L, P etc) iRegX iRegXNoSp There is also this single operand iRegIorL2I iRegX matches any register holding a value of type X from R0 to R31. iRegXNoSp matches any non-special register holding a value of type X from R0 to R26 i.e. it omits the special registers R27 to R31 that are dedicated to storing VM/frame state i.e. rheapbase, rthread, fp, lr and sp. We could perhaps relabel these to iRegXAll and iRegXGen or some other name of choice. However, I am not sure that it is any more apparent to anyone who doesn't already understand what is going on that an All (or, say, Any) register is any more or less general than a Gen register. I think the real problem here is that those of us who do know what is going on did not adequately review the proposed changes which mistakenly employed the wrong register types. Will this change help us? I am not really convinced. With any of these current or possible future names it is very apparent what registers any given operand will select for matching or assignment if i) you know/look up the register classes they are derived from and ii) you understand how that definition gets used by the matcher/register allocator. The 3rd operand iRegIorL2I is specific to AArch64 rules. It allows a rule requiring a 32 bit integer (I) input to match and directly consume a value generated as a 64 bit integer (L) output by some other rule without the need for an intervening L2I to be employed. Without it we would need to duplicate all rules employing iRegIorL2I inputs to handle both iRegI and iRegL case handling. I don't think this is a particularly bad name and would not really want to change it. More importantly, as before, I don't think any name is going to help someone who doesn't already understand what is going recognise what this rule does and know how to use this operand. If we do anything I would prefer just to expand iRegXNoSp to iRegXNoSpecial which avoids the potential ambiguous reading that it means no Stack Pointer. That may invite 'lay' readers to wonder what NoSpecial means and perhaps, in consequence, to consider what they are doing and ask for advice before trying to write new rules. regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From adinn at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 10:44:40 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:44:40 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] jdk8: backport of 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption Message-ID: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> The patch included inline below is against the latest aarch64-port-dev/jdk8u tree. It backports the upstream jdk9 fix for JDK-8177661 fixing a critical potential crasher bug. It has been tested by running java Hello, javac Hello.java and netbeans. Ok, to push? regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander ----- 8<-------- 8<-------- 8<-------- 8<-------- 8<-------- 8<--- # HG changeset patch # User adinn # Date 1490695969 14400 # Tue Mar 28 06:12:49 2017 -0400 # Node ID 142389cae1d354241d0268f610fda174d009e596 # Parent daf232a19060305db8af63c118ae3e66f8670468 Correct ad rule output register types from iRegX to iRegXNoSp Backport to jdk8 of JDK9 fix for JDK-8177661 diff -r daf232a19060 -r 142389cae1d3 src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad --- a/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad Mon Jan 23 21:28:30 2017 +0000 +++ b/src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad Tue Mar 28 06:12:49 2017 -0400 @@ -15152,7 +15152,7 @@ %} instruct string_indexof(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, iRegI_R2 cnt2, - iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) + iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) %{ match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 cnt2))); effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, USE_KILL cnt2, @@ -15170,8 +15170,8 @@ %} instruct string_indexof_con(iRegP_R1 str1, iRegI_R4 cnt1, iRegP_R3 str2, - immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegI tmp1, iRegI tmp2, - iRegI tmp3, iRegI tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) + immI_le_4 int_cnt2, iRegI_R0 result, iRegINoSp tmp1, iRegINoSp tmp2, + iRegINoSp tmp3, iRegINoSp tmp4, rFlagsReg cr) %{ match(Set result (StrIndexOf (Binary str1 cnt1) (Binary str2 int_cnt2))); effect(USE_KILL str1, USE_KILL str2, USE_KILL cnt1, From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 13:00:53 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:00:53 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] jdk8: backport of 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> References: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> Message-ID: <53ac52fa-9c05-77c9-a350-8560613ce986@redhat.com> On 28/03/17 11:44, Andrew Dinn wrote: > The patch included inline below is against the latest > aarch64-port-dev/jdk8u tree. It backports the upstream jdk9 fix for > JDK-8177661 fixing a critical potential crasher bug. > > It has been tested by running java Hello, javac Hello.java and netbeans. > > Ok, to push? Yes, please, to http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u/hotspot/ and http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/ I guess it doesn't need to go into http://hg.openjdk.java.net/shenandoah/jdk9/hotspot/ because the Shenandoah folks will pick it up from jdk9. Andrew. From adinn at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 13:31:17 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (adinn at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:31:17 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u/hotspot: Correct ad rule output register types from iRegX to iRegXNoSp Message-ID: <201703281331.v2SDVHTe003999@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: 142389cae1d3 Author: adinn Date: 2017-03-28 06:12 -0400 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/142389cae1d3 Correct ad rule output register types from iRegX to iRegXNoSp Backport to jdk8 of JDK9 fix for JDK-8177661 ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad From aph at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 13:45:10 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 14:45:10 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] Notations and reliability In-Reply-To: <3c74099f-cd90-5628-e29c-102d68470f2a@redhat.com> References: <1f8b11bd-f5bf-89e2-e22d-2266382fd46c@redhat.com> <3c74099f-cd90-5628-e29c-102d68470f2a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <96d95ea5-11a5-1455-aec9-c453ccfc30de@redhat.com> On 28/03/17 11:28, Andrew Dinn wrote: > On 28/03/17 10:16, Andrew Haley wrote: >> We've come a cropper a couple of times because of poorly-chosen >> notations. Several times we've had a confusion between iRegI and >> iRegINoSp, which causes very obscure crashes. Also, a little while >> ago I found several bugs (all mine) caused by getting mixed up between >> e.g. strw and str. >> >> I now believe that I made a mistake when I assumed that Xwords >> (i.e. 64 bits) were in some way the "default" size on AArch64 and >> omitted the X suffix on them. In hindsight, it is much better for >> every operation to have a size associated with it, so the programmer >> would be forced to choose which one to use, and state it explicitly. >> This is how the "standard" assembly language works, and it is better >> than what we do. >> >> [Interestingly, the Oracle-authored AArch64 port made exactly the >> same (poor, IMO) choice. Perhaps programmers' brains are isomorphic.] >> >> With regard to register classes, GCC uses "GENERAL_REGS" as the name >> of the register class that can be allocated as a general-purpose >> operands, with "ALL_REGS" for everything. It would be better we did >> something similar. > > We do actually have quite clear names for the register /classes/ much as > per x86. The names giving rise to the confusion are those employed in > the /operand/ definitions. Note that unlike the register classes these > all come in multiple flavours -- I, L,P, N etc -- according to the type > of value that will be found in the register. I don't think our names are > actually that much more opaque than x86. For example, it has > > rRegI > rRegP > any_RegP > no_rax_rdx_RegL > ... > > It's not actually very clear what is the difference between rRegP and > any_RegP until you refer back to the register classes. Perhaps, but being no worse than x86 is a low bar. We should be able to improve on that. > iRegX matches any register holding a value of type X from R0 to R31. > iRegXNoSp matches any non-special register holding a value of type X > from R0 to R26 i.e. it omits the special registers R27 to R31 that are > dedicated to storing VM/frame state i.e. rheapbase, rthread, fp, lr and sp. > > We could perhaps relabel these to > > iRegXAll and iRegXGen > > or some other name of choice. However, I am not sure that it is any more > apparent to anyone who doesn't already understand what is going on that > an All (or, say, Any) register is any more or less general than a Gen > register. All else being equal, people tend to prefer short names. I was thinking of something along the lines of RegI, RegL etc. to replace the iRegXNoSP, and AnyRegX to replace iRegX. (That "i" prefix is awkward and pointless on this architecture, so I think we won't miss it. We don't put floats into integer registers.) RegX is almost always harmless, I think, except that we need to be able to move to and from special registers. > I think the real problem here is that those of us who do know > what is going on did not adequately review the proposed changes which > mistakenly employed the wrong register types. It's both. The notation itself is error-prone, and the reviewer (me, probably) didn't spot the errors. The key here is to make the odd case stand out. It'd be in red if I had my way. > Will this change help us? I am not really convinced. With any of these > current or possible future names it is very apparent what registers any > given operand will select for matching or assignment if i) you know/look > up the register classes they are derived from and ii) you understand how > that definition gets used by the matcher/register allocator. > > The 3rd operand iRegIorL2I is specific to AArch64 rules. Sure, I don't think we need to change that one, except for the "i". > I don't think this is a particularly bad name and would not really want > to change it. More importantly, as before, I don't think any name is > going to help someone who doesn't already understand what is going > recognise what this rule does and know how to use this operand. > > If we do anything I would prefer just to expand iRegXNoSp to > iRegXNoSpecial which avoids the potential ambiguous reading that it > means no Stack Pointer. That may invite 'lay' readers to wonder what > NoSpecial means and perhaps, in consequence, to consider what they are > doing and ask for advice before trying to write new rules. I think that makes it worse, and invite you to consider the possibility that you're a bit too close to this to see it from the POV of the maintenance programmer. Wording it in the negative in this way is rather unhelpful because it looks like an exception, whereas in fact it is an allocatable register. The "safe" default should be the easy short one. Andrew. From adinn at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 16:44:43 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (adinn at redhat.com) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:44:43 +0000 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] hg: aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot: Correct ad rule output register types from iRegX to iRegXNoSp Message-ID: <201703281644.v2SGihJj028217@aojmv0008.oracle.com> Changeset: e22d85bf039e Author: adinn Date: 2017-03-28 06:12 -0400 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/rev/e22d85bf039e Correct ad rule output register types from iRegX to iRegXNoSp Backport to jdk8 of JDK9 fix for JDK-8177661 ! src/cpu/aarch64/vm/aarch64.ad From ci_notify at linaro.org Tue Mar 28 17:19:17 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 17:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <2013838451.3007.1490721557873.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/086/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 4 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,226; fail: 714; error: 19 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,253; fail: 727; error: 24 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,294; fail: 689; error: 21 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,278; fail: 713; error: 23 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 7,304; fail: 690; error: 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,859; error: 2 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,876; error: 5 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,886; fail: 1 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 3,883; error: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 1,378; fail: 6; error: 1 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,394; fail: 6 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,397; fail: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 1,396; fail: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 7,235; fail: 707; error: 17 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,261; fail: 723; error: 20 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,271; fail: 712; error: 21 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,284; fail: 708; error: 22 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 7,297; fail: 695; error: 22 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/22 pass: 3,858; error: 3 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,879; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,885; error: 2 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 3,881; error: 6 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.02x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.88x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 71.29, Server: 114.76 Client 71.29 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.66x Server 114.76 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.62x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-23 pass rate: 6050/6050, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/053/results/ 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ 2017-03-20 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/078/results/ 2017-03-22 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/080/results/ 2017-03-26 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/084/results/ 2017-03-28 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/086/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From shade at redhat.com Tue Mar 28 18:24:36 2017 From: shade at redhat.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 20:24:36 +0200 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: <2013838451.3007.1490721557873.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> References: <2013838451.3007.1490721557873.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> Message-ID: <1394ae8e-edd3-c8d0-e912-edbe2b9a5cd9@redhat.com> On 03/28/2017 07:19 PM, ci_notify at linaro.org wrote: > 2017-03-28 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/086/results/ Please pull new jcstress suite: it has the sorted reported test lists, new tests, etc. Would make it easier to diagnose. Thanks, -Aleksey From stuart.monteith at linaro.org Wed Mar 29 10:29:49 2017 From: stuart.monteith at linaro.org (Stuart Monteith) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 11:29:49 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 In-Reply-To: <1394ae8e-edd3-c8d0-e912-edbe2b9a5cd9@redhat.com> References: <2013838451.3007.1490721557873.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> <1394ae8e-edd3-c8d0-e912-edbe2b9a5cd9@redhat.com> Message-ID: Hello, On closer inspection, the failure is occurring not because of JCStress, but because of the script that executes it. It isn't able to persist the new results, and so the data being presented it stale. I'll have a think about how we handle this, as it is misleading. We use freshly built JCStress jars, so it'll pickup the new results in the next build. Thanks, Stuart On 28 March 2017 at 19:24, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > On 03/28/2017 07:19 PM, ci_notify at linaro.org wrote: >> 2017-03-28 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/086/results/ > > Please pull new jcstress suite: it has the sorted reported test lists, new > tests, etc. Would make it easier to diagnose. > > Thanks, > -Aleksey > > > From ci_notify at linaro.org Wed Mar 29 23:11:36 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:11:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 8u on AArch64 Message-ID: <1076986715.3141.1490829097238.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/088/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/dec/01 pass: 668; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 668; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 672; fail: 44; error: 3 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 672; fail: 44; error: 3 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 672; fail: 44; error: 3 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 672; fail: 44; error: 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 5,621; fail: 219; error: 45 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 5,683; fail: 213; error: 36 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 5,667; fail: 234; error: 41 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 5,701; fail: 217; error: 27 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 5,686; fail: 225; error: 34 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/dec/01 pass: 3,091; error: 16 Build 1: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 3,096; error: 11 Build 2: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 3,098; error: 13 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 3,094; error: 17 Build 4: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 3,106; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 3,105; fail: 2; error: 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/nov/03 pass: 664; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 1: aarch64/2016/nov/08 pass: 664; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2016/nov/09 pass: 664; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 3: aarch64/2016/nov/21 pass: 668; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 4: aarch64/2016/dec/01 pass: 669; fail: 43; error: 6 Build 5: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 668; fail: 44; error: 6 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 673; fail: 43; error: 3 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 673; fail: 43; error: 3 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 673; fail: 43; error: 3 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 673; fail: 43; error: 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 5,618; fail: 226; error: 41 Build 1: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 5,690; fail: 206; error: 36 Build 2: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 5,669; fail: 214; error: 59 Build 3: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 5,701; fail: 221; error: 23 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 5,696; fail: 222; error: 27 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2016/nov/03 pass: 3,092; error: 15 Build 1: aarch64/2016/nov/08 pass: 3,092; error: 15 Build 2: aarch64/2016/nov/09 pass: 3,091; error: 16 Build 3: aarch64/2016/nov/21 pass: 3,095; error: 12 Build 4: aarch64/2016/dec/01 pass: 3,095; error: 12 Build 5: aarch64/2016/dec/21 pass: 3,092; error: 15 Build 6: aarch64/2017/jan/18 pass: 3,102; error: 9 Build 7: aarch64/2017/feb/04 pass: 3,099; error: 12 Build 8: aarch64/2017/feb/24 pass: 3,109; error: 3 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/29 pass: 3,104; fail: 2; error: 6 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 0.97x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.97x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/SPECjbb2015-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: 57.61, Server: 108.58 Client 57.61 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.34x Server 108.58 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.53x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2016-11-03 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2016/308/results/ 2016-11-21 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2016/326/results/ 2016-12-01 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2016/336/results/ 2016-12-22 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2016/356/results/ 2017-01-18 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/018/results/ 2017-02-06 pass rate: 5140/5140, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/035/results/ 2017-02-25 pass rate: 5176/5176, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/055/results/ 2017-03-29 pass rate: 8484/8485, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/088/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk8u/jcstress-nightly-runs/ From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Wed Mar 29 23:26:52 2017 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 19:26:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] jdk8: backport of 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <53ac52fa-9c05-77c9-a350-8560613ce986@redhat.com> References: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> <53ac52fa-9c05-77c9-a350-8560613ce986@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1911453721.17127167.1490830012926.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On 28/03/17 11:44, Andrew Dinn wrote: > > The patch included inline below is against the latest > > aarch64-port-dev/jdk8u tree. It backports the upstream jdk9 fix for > > JDK-8177661 fixing a critical potential crasher bug. > > > > It has been tested by running java Hello, javac Hello.java and netbeans. > > > > Ok, to push? > > Yes, please, to http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u/hotspot/ > and http://hg.openjdk.java.net/aarch64-port/jdk8u-shenandoah/hotspot/ > > I guess it doesn't need to go into > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/shenandoah/jdk9/hotspot/ because the > Shenandoah folks will pick it up from jdk9. > > Andrew. > > There's no need to put it in jdk8u-shenandoah either, as it pulls changes from aarch64/jdk8u anyway. -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Web Site: http://fuseyism.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222 From zhongwei.yao at linaro.org Thu Mar 30 01:43:40 2017 From: zhongwei.yao at linaro.org (Zhongwei Yao) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:43:40 +0800 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] aarch64 and arm64 jdk benchmarks result sharing Message-ID: Hi, We have been running some Java benchmarks on AArch64 servers with different OpenJDK ports: aarch64 and arm64. You can find the results at [1]. And our JDK version: - aarch64 OpenJDK: build from latest JDK9 source with config: "--with-jvm-variants=server --with-debug-level=release" - arm64 OpenJDK: build from latest JDK9 source with config: "--with-jvm-variants=server --with-debug-level=release --wi th-cpu-port=arm64" And from the data, aarch64 OpenJDK is better than arm64 OpenJDK generally, but with some exceptions. So we think it is worth to take a look at following cases for aarch64 OpenJDK: - Dacapo's sunflow, tradebeans and xalan - SPECjvm2008's scimark.lu.large And we also find arm64 is better than aarch64 for byte/short data type vectorization in our JMH cases ([2]), which we are investigating. Feedbacks are welcome. Thanks! [1]: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18iklOrbaL67i46XHsPTrdTObWqUJJK8EO4-k0eqdLKM/edit?usp=sharing [2]: https://git.linaro.org/leg/openjdk/jmh-linaro-org.git/ -- Best regards, Zhongwei From aph at redhat.com Thu Mar 30 08:03:36 2017 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:03:36 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] jdk8: backport of 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <1911453721.17127167.1490830012926.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> <53ac52fa-9c05-77c9-a350-8560613ce986@redhat.com> <1911453721.17127167.1490830012926.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <45f9c343-459e-5eb2-89e7-835721f8313e@redhat.com> On 30/03/17 00:26, Andrew Hughes wrote: > There's no need to put it in jdk8u-shenandoah either, as it pulls changes > from aarch64/jdk8u anyway. Mmm, I know that, but on what clock tick are those changes pulled? Andrew. From adinn at redhat.com Thu Mar 30 08:50:37 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 09:50:37 +0100 Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] jdk8: backport of 8177661: AArch64: Incorrect C2 patterns cause system register corruption In-Reply-To: <1911453721.17127167.1490830012926.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <349a8ce3-4377-4c19-fee8-020d7fbc8ee5@redhat.com> <53ac52fa-9c05-77c9-a350-8560613ce986@redhat.com> <1911453721.17127167.1490830012926.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <29572770-19f1-9e70-c769-dbbd7cf7eb3f@redhat.com> On 30/03/17 00:26, Andrew Hughes wrote: > There's no need to put it in jdk8u-shenandoah either, as it pulls changes > from aarch64/jdk8u anyway. Oh well, dutiful as I am I have already pushed the jdk8u patch. I presume it will make no difference in the long run. regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- From ci_notify at linaro.org Fri Mar 31 15:24:16 2017 From: ci_notify at linaro.org (ci_notify at linaro.org) Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 15:24:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [aarch64-port-dev ] JTREG, JCStress, SPECjbb2015 and Hadoop/Terasort results for OpenJDK 9 on AArch64 Message-ID: <1920085702.3436.1490973857089.JavaMail.jenkins@ci.linaro.org> This is a summary of the JTREG test results =========================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/summary/2017/089/summary.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,386; fail: 5 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,387; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,388; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,387; fail: 6 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,390; fail: 6 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,391; fail: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 1,393; fail: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,266; fail: 705; error: 20 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,274; fail: 695; error: 23 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,264; fail: 711; error: 17 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,272; fail: 705; error: 15 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,252; fail: 720; error: 21 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,251; fail: 720; error: 23 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,263; fail: 718; error: 18 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,268; fail: 710; error: 21 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,283; fail: 693; error: 25 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,273; fail: 709; error: 20 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,253; fail: 727; error: 24 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,294; fail: 689; error: 21 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,278; fail: 713; error: 23 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 7,304; fail: 690; error: 20 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 7,302; fail: 691; error: 23 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- client-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,859; error: 4 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,861; error: 2 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,862; error: 2 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,866; error: 1 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,872; error: 1 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,874; error: 4 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,878; error: 2 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,876; error: 5 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,886; fail: 1 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 3,883; error: 4 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 3,883; fail: 3; error: 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/hotspot ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 1,389; fail: 5 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 1,388; fail: 6 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 1,390; fail: 5 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 1,391; fail: 6 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 1,392; fail: 5 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 1,395; fail: 5 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 1,394; fail: 6 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 1,397; fail: 4 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 1,396; fail: 5 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 1,397; fail: 4 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/jdk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 7,279; fail: 694; error: 18 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 7,265; fail: 708; error: 19 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 7,266; fail: 710; error: 16 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 7,284; fail: 689; error: 19 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 7,257; fail: 720; error: 16 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 7,296; fail: 679; error: 19 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 7,261; fail: 722; error: 16 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 7,290; fail: 687; error: 22 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 7,285; fail: 697; error: 19 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 7,278; fail: 703; error: 21 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 7,261; fail: 723; error: 20 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 7,271; fail: 712; error: 21 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 7,284; fail: 708; error: 22 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 7,297; fail: 695; error: 22 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 7,294; fail: 701; error: 21 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- server-release/langtools ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Build 0: aarch64/2017/feb/25 pass: 3,860; error: 3 Build 1: aarch64/2017/feb/28 pass: 3,862; error: 1 Build 2: aarch64/2017/mar/01 pass: 3,860; error: 4 Build 3: aarch64/2017/mar/02 pass: 3,858; fail: 1; error: 5 Build 4: aarch64/2017/mar/03 pass: 3,863; fail: 1; error: 2 Build 5: aarch64/2017/mar/08 pass: 3,867 Build 6: aarch64/2017/mar/11 pass: 3,873 Build 7: aarch64/2017/mar/13 pass: 3,871; error: 2 Build 8: aarch64/2017/mar/15 pass: 3,878 Build 9: aarch64/2017/mar/17 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 10: aarch64/2017/mar/19 pass: 3,876; error: 4 Build 11: aarch64/2017/mar/21 pass: 3,879; error: 2 Build 12: aarch64/2017/mar/25 pass: 3,885; error: 2 Build 13: aarch64/2017/mar/27 pass: 3,881; error: 6 Build 14: aarch64/2017/mar/30 pass: 3,879; fail: 2; error: 6 Previous results can be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/openjdk-jtreg-nightly-tests/index.html SPECjbb2015 composite regression test completed =============================================== This test measures the relative performance of the server compiler running the SPECjbb2015 composite tests and compares the performance against the baseline performance of the server compiler taken on 2016-11-21. In accordance with [1], the SPECjbb2015 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): 1.02x Relative performance: Server critical-jOPS (nc): 0.89x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/SPECjbb2015-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: 72.38, Server: 119.62 Client 72.38 / Client 2014-04-01 (43.00): 1.68x Server 119.62 / Server 2014-04-01 (71.00): 1.68x Details of the test setup and historical results may be found here: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/hadoop-terasort-benchmark-results/ This is a summary of the jcstress test results ============================================== The build and test results are cycled every 15 days. 2017-02-26 pass rate: 6300/6302, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/056/results/ 2017-03-01 pass rate: 6300/6303, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/059/results/ 2017-03-02 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/060/results/ 2017-03-03 pass rate: 10525/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/061/results/ 2017-03-05 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/062/results/ 2017-03-09 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/067/results/ 2017-03-12 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/070/results/ 2017-03-14 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/072/results/ 2017-03-16 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/074/results/ 2017-03-18 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/076/results/ 2017-03-20 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/078/results/ 2017-03-22 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/080/results/ 2017-03-26 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/084/results/ 2017-03-28 pass rate: 10524/11284, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/086/results/ 2017-03-31 pass rate: 11552/11554, results: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/2017/089/results/ For detailed information on the test output please refer to: http://openjdk.linaro.org/jdk9/jcstress-nightly-runs/