RFR: 8343698: Linux x86_64 lto build gives a lot of warnings and fails lto-wrapper: fatal error: make returned 2 exit status

[Matthias Baesken]

On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 07:08:08 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> When trying LTO (configure flag --enable-jvm-feature-link-time-opt=yes) on Linux x86_64, gcc 11.3.0, we run into a lot of warnings and finally into this error :
>> 
>>  .. tons of free and malloc related warnings ...
>> 
>> 
>>     inlined from 'pop_segment' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/stack.inline.hpp:188:9,
>>     inlined from 'pop' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/stack.inline.hpp:84:30,
>>     inlined from 'pop_overflow' at src/hotspot/share/gc/shared/taskqueue.inline.hpp:231:28,
>>     inlined from 'trim_queue_to_threshold' at src/hotspot/share/gc/g1/g1ParScanThreadState.cpp:328:37:
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:666:3: warning: call to 'malloc' declared with attribute warning: use os::malloc [-Wattribute-warning]
>> src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:666:3: warning: call to 'malloc' declared with attribute warning: use os::malloc [-Wattribute-warning]
>> In function 'malloc',
>>     inlined from 'malloc' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:637:0,
>>     inlined from 'AllocateHeap' at src/hotspot/share/memory/allocation.cpp:42:31,
>>     inlined from 'new_entry' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocSiteTable.cpp:181:25,
>>     inlined from 'lookup_or_add' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocSiteTable.cpp:122:48,
>>     inlined from 'allocation_at' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocSiteTable.hpp:151:37,
>>     inlined from 'record_malloc' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocTracker.cpp:179:35,
>>     inlined from 'record_malloc' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/memTracker.hpp:81:42,
>>     inlined from 'realloc' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:746:58,
>>     inlined from 'ReallocateHeap' at src/hotspot/share/memory/allocation.cpp:59:32,
>>     inlined from 'grow' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/ostream.cpp:377:15,
>>     inlined from 'write' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/ostream.cpp:400:11,
>>     inlined from 'write' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/ostream.cpp:382:0,
>>     inlined from 'put' at src/hotspot/share/utilities/ostream.cpp:212:8,
>>     inlined from 'print_ascii_form' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:965:19,
>>     inlined from 'print_hex_location' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:1008:21,
>>     inlined from 'print_hex_dump' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.cpp:1050:23,
>>     inlined from 'print_hex_dump' at src/hotspot/share/runtime/os.hpp:869:19,
>>     inlined from 'print_block_on_error' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocHeader.cpp:64:23,
>>     inlined from 'resolve_checked_impl' at src/hotspot/share/nmt/mallocHeader.inline.hpp:106:41,
>>     inlined from 'resolve_checked' at src...
>
> make/hotspot/lib/JvmFeatures.gmk line 173:
> 
>> 171:   JVM_OPTIMIZATION := HIGHEST_JVM
>> 172:   ifeq ($(call isCompiler, gcc), true)
>> 173:     JVM_CFLAGS_FEATURES += -DINCLUDE_LTO=1 -flto=auto -fuse-linker-plugin -fno-strict-aliasing \
> 
> I'm not sure why this was included in this PR (and similarly below), since
> there's no use of it anywhere. However, it would be useful for
> conditionalizing the definition of FORBID_C_FUNCTION, as suggested in JBS. But
> just adding the defines here is not sufficient. In utilities/macros.hpp, there
> should be a conditional #define to the default value (0) if the macro is not
> already defined, so that we can consistently use `#if INCLUDE_LTO` and
> `#if !INCLUDE_LTO`.

It was included because all JVM features have a related define (e.g. INCLUDE_JFR) and I missed that one here.
Or is it already available and I just missed the define related to link-time-optimization ?
But in a way you are correct , currently the added define it not needed technically in this PR .
And we might think about the naming (INCLUDE_LINK_TIME_OPTIMIZATION vs. INCLUDE_LTO).

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22069#discussion_r1841809763