RFR (S): JDK-8142909 Integration of minor fixes from the build-infra project

[Erik Joelsson]

On 2015-11-16 12:11, David Holmes wrote:
> On 16/11/2015 6:22 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2015-11-16 03:10, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Magnus,
>>>
>>> On 13/11/2015 9:33 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>>> On 2015-11-13 09:13, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> make/bsd/makefiles/amd64.make:
>>>>> make/bsd/makefiles/gcc.make:
>>>>> Perhaps the order of "$(OPT_CFLAGS/NOOPT) $(OPT_CFLAGS/$(BUILDARCH))"
>>>>> should be reversed to guarantee that NOOPT is the one used in case
>>>>> BUILDARCH contains something that conflicts? The solaris file does it
>>>>> this way.
>>>> You know you wrote that code originally? ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I agree, it's more reasonable. Updated webrev:
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8142909-hotspot-build-infra-integration/webrev.02 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't like this particular change as it is too generic. It gives the
>>> appearance of being apply to apply whatever the BUILDARCH specific
>>> optflags are, which makes no sense if the whole point here is to not
>>> optimize these files. If all this is intended to do is include -g then
>>> I think that should be done explicitly.
>>>
>> The -g flag is added to OPT_CFLAGS/$(BUILDARCH) and I can only assume
>> the intention was to have it added to all compilation command lines.
>> However, the OPT_CFLAGS/<filename> variable overrides
>> CFLAGS/$(BUILDARCH), effectively removing the -g flag from the files
>> where we explicitly change the optimization level. The patch intends to
>> make sure -g is used on those files too.
>
> I understand that, but it is far from obvious that OPT_FLAGS/BUILDARCH 
> means -g (why???), or that putting other things in that variable might 
> break files that should not be optimized.
>
>> A cleaner solution would be to not have -g be part of the OPT flags at
>> all but its own set of DEBUG_CFLAGS.
>
> I thought -g was in the DEBUG_CFLAGS ?? Or maybe it used to be. Anyway 
> if all we are interested in is adding -g then I agree it should have 
> its own variable.
>
I looked some more at this. There is a DEBUG_CFLAGS, FASTDEBUG_CFLAGS 
and OPT_CFLAGS. These get picked depending on the debug level of the 
build. For example in product.make, $(OPT_CFLAGS/BYFILE) gets added to 
CFLAGS.

I can't really see a better way of making sure the -g does not fall off 
for some files than what is proposed here. At least not without 
completely reworking the flags handling in the current hotspot 
makefiles, something I'm very uninterested in doing.
>>> ---
>>>
>>> make/bsd/makefiles/saproc.make
>>>
>>> ! # Order src files alfabetically
>>>
>>> That would be "alphabetically". But that list doesn't seem alphabetic
>>> anyway: MacosxDebuggerLocal.m would come after libproc_impl.c; and
>>> $(AGENTDIR) should come first. I really see no point in forcing such
>>> lists to be in alphabetic order.
>>>
>> This is to make comparison of binaries between the old hotspot build and
>> the new hotspot build easier. In build-infra, we $(sort ) the object
>> files before linking to get a reproducible order. The linker output is
>> affected by the order of the object files. By making sure the old and
>> the new build sorts them the same way, we get cleaner comparisons and
>> can more easily detect other types of differences through those
>> comparisons. The sort order isn't strictly alphabetical, it's on byte
>> order so upper case goes before lower case.
>
> I saw the change for the ordered object files on Windows, but this 
> simply orders source files in a list. Not sure how that has any affect 
> on the linking ??
>
It has an effect on the linking because that list is used verbatim on 
the combined compile/link command line.

/Erik
> Cheers,
> David
>
>> /Erik
>>> make/linux/makefiles/saproc.make doesn't have the comment that was
>>> added for bsd.
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>> make/solaris/makefiles/amd64.make
>>>
>>> Similar issue with bsd amd64.make. Not sure what you are trying to
>>> achieve here - is it some kind of last option wins situation ?
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> make/windows/create_obj_files.sh
>>>
>>> Harmless I guess but not sure about relevance of sort order here.
>>>
>>> ----
>>>
>>>  src/share/vm/adlc/adlparse.cpp
>>>
>>> So that's where that comes from! :)
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> src/share/vm/gc/g1/g1EvacStats.cpp
>>>
>>> I don't see anything in the cpp files that uses anything from the
>>> atomic class ???
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> /Magnus
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Otherwise looks good.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Erik
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-11-13 03:34, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>>>>> In the new hotspot build project, we have made a few changes to the
>>>>>> existing build. In preparation for the new build, I'd like to
>>>>>> integrate these into mainline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These changes are:
>>>>>> * When overriding optimization, do not lose current debug (-g)
>>>>>> setting (!)
>>>>>> * Make adlc actually quiet in quiet mode
>>>>>> * Make g1EvacStats.cpp compile in all cases without precompiled
>>>>>> headers
>>>>>> * Sort saproc object files when linking (facilitates comparison to
>>>>>> new build)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unless someone suggests otherwise, I intend to push this (using 
>>>>>> JPRT)
>>>>>> to hs-rt.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8142909
>>>>>> WebRev:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8142909-hotspot-build-infra-integration/webrev.01 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Magnus
>>>>>
>>>>
>>