RFR: JDK-8162354: Unable to build JDK 9 on a Sparc T7-1 with default boot-jdk 8.0

[Seán Coffey]

One suggestion to future proof your fix might be to pattern match 
against any CPU of M7 of greater perhaps. Something like SPARC-M[7+] 
perhaps.

Regards,
Sean.

On 03/08/16 11:47, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Followup on this. I did a compare build on Solaris with 8GA and 8u20. 
> There is a slight difference for these class files:
>
> /jdk.compiler/com/sun/tools/javac/resources/CompilerProperties$Errors.class 
>
> /jdk.compiler/com/sun/tools/javac/resources/CompilerProperties$Fragments.class 
>
> /jdk.compiler/com/sun/tools/javac/resources/CompilerProperties$Notes.class 
>
> /jdk.compiler/com/sun/tools/javac/resources/CompilerProperties$Warnings.class 
>
> /jdk.compiler/com/sun/tools/javac/resources/CompilerProperties.class
>
> The source file is generated and also differs. Without digging deeper, 
> it looks like it's just ordering of methods, fields and/or inner 
> classes, which is caused by the generator program not specifying the 
> order, likely by using an unordered collection to store them during 
> generation. While this is most likely fine, it's good practice to have 
> the build more deterministic.
>
> /Erik
>
>
> On 2016-08-03 11:11, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~erikj/8162354/webrev.02/
>>
>> I found that the first working update was 8u20 and changed to use 
>> that instead for minimal impact.
>>
>> /Erik
>>
>> On 2016-08-03 09:08, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2016-08-03 04:20, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> Hi Erik,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/08/2016 1:11 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> The default bootjdk for 9 is JDK 8. Unfortunately JDK 8 does not 
>>>>> work on
>>>>> newer M7 sparc hardware. This has of course been fixed in an update.
>>>>> This patch changes the Jib profile configuration to use 8u102 as 
>>>>> bootjdk
>>>>> on Solaris sparc if the cpu is of the M7 type.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't 8u102 a bit too recent to use - shouldn't we use the oldest 
>>>> version that works on M7?
>>>>
>>> That is a good point. Either go with latest greatest when changing 
>>> or try to find the minimum change. We had a similar problem in JDK 8 
>>> where 7GA did not work on macosx. At that time we took the first 
>>> working version. I will see if I can figure out which one it is at 
>>> least.
>>>> Does this actually affect official builds (do they use M7) or does 
>>>> this simply enable use of M7 in the other build processes (JPRT etc)?
>>>>
>>> Unclear. The new hardware we received is M7, so without a change we 
>>> can't use that hardware for any builds, which would be sad since the 
>>> machine is very fast. I suspect that down the line we will want to 
>>> use this class of hardware in all types of build scenarios. IMO, we 
>>> get adequate testing that the 8GA as boot (which is the defined 
>>> bootjdk) works on all the other platforms.
>>>
>>> /Erik
>>>
>>
>