build problems on sparc64-linux

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Saturday 02 January 2010 09:02:47 am Matthias Klose wrote:
> I see a build failure of current 6b17 from the IcedTea6 branch on
> sparc64-linux using the original hotspot, but not on sparc-linux (32bit).
> The build fails building abstractCompiler.cpp in
> build/linux-sparcv9/hotspot/outputdir/linux_sparcv9_compiler2/product
> 
> .../hotspot/src/cpu/sparc/vm/assembler_sparc.hpp:1069: error: inline
> function 'void Assembler::emit_long(int)' used but never defined
> .../hotspot/src/cpu/sparc/vm/assembler_sparc.hpp:1083: error: inline
> function 'void Assembler::add(RegisterImpl*, int, RegisterImpl*,
> relocInfo::relocType)' used but never defined
> .../hotspot/src/cpu/sparc/vm/assembler_sparc.hpp:1514: error: inline
> function 'void Assembler::stb(RegisterImpl*, const Address&, int)' used
> but never defined .../hotspot/src/cpu/sparc/vm/assembler_sparc.hpp:1291:
> error: inline function 'void Assembler::ldsb(const Address&,
> RegisterImpl*, int)' used but never defined
> .../hotspot/src/cpu/sparc/vm/assembler_sparc.hpp:1507: error: inline
> function 'void Assembler::st(RegisterImpl*, RegisterImpl*, RegisterImpl*)'
> used but never defined
> 
> these are all defined in assembler_sparc.inline.hpp. not using precompiled
> headers and -save-temps shows that assembler_sparc.inline.hpp is not
> included in the saved .ii file.
> 
> I currently fail to see how assembler_x86.inline.hpp and
> assembler_zero.inline.hpp are included (or assembler_sparc.inline.hpp on
> sparc 32bit). Any hints?
> 
> patches/icedtea-sparc-trapsfix.patch is patched to include asm/traps.h
> instead of asm-sparc/traps.h only for one sparc architecture. I don't see
> asm-sparc/traps.h anymore with recent kernel headers. maybe this should be
> build configure check depending on the kernel headers used?
one of the sparc patches in fedora is dealing with the new header locations. 
kernel headers got moved when sparc and sparc64 kernel trees merged.

> the fedora packaging repository does have two sparc patches not found in
> IcedTea. Are these still applied? Does the fedora build acctually build and
> work in it's current state?
yes  and yes  at least with the last build we did 
https://sparc.koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=42183

If you have any sparc questions feel free to ask me.

Dennis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20100114/d05a6dcc/attachment.bin