RFR(M): 8166560: [s390] Basic enablement of s390 port.

[Lindenmaier, Goetz]

Hi Coleen, 

your're right, this is the ideal candidate for a _pd flag:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-basic_s390/hotspot.wr05

Thanks for reviewing, 
  Goetz.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Coleen Phillimore [mailto:coleen.phillimore at oracle.com]
> Sent: Montag, 10. Oktober 2016 21:29
> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>; hotspot-
> dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR(M): 8166560: [s390] Basic enablement of s390 port.
> 
> 
> Yes, this change seems fine.
> 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-
> basic_s390/hotspot.wr04/src/share/vm/runtime/globals.hpp.udiff.html
> 
> It might make sense to have CodeCacheSegmentSize develop_pd() though,
> since I can't really read this expression with all the macros in it.
> Your choice though.
> 
> Coleen
> 
> On 10/10/16 2:38 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> > Hi Coleen,
> >
> > can I consider this reviewed?  I removed the change to mutex.
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-
> basic_s390/hotspot.wr04/
> >
> > Thanks and best regards,
> >    Goetz.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: hotspot-dev [mailto:hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On
> >> Behalf Of Coleen Phillimore
> >> Sent: Dienstag, 27. September 2016 20:30
> >> To: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: Re: RFR(M): 8166560: [s390] Basic enablement of s390 port.
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, I'm surprised there aren't more changes, probably because of the
> >> #include work that was done by you previously.  Which is great.
> >>
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-
> >> basic_s390/hotspot.wr01/src/share/vm/runtime/mutex.hpp.udiff.html
> >>
> >> Can you describe this change?  This makes all of the mutex's take a lot
> >> of space, and some don't have very long names.  Was this added to avoid
> >> false sharing as the comment implies or to support longer names in
> >> monitors?
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> Coleen
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/27/16 1:57 PM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:11 AM, David Holmes
> <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Goetz,
> >>>>
> >>>> I see a change not related directly to S390 ie change from ARM to
> ARM32
> >> in
> >>>> src/os/linux/vm/os_linux.cpp
> >>>>
> >>> The change looks a little confusing because Goetz reordered the ifdef
> >>> cascades alphabetically (which I think is good).
> >>>
> >>> Besides that, the only real change not related to s390 is indeed the
> >>> change from ARM to ARM32 which happend two times in the file.
> >>>
> >>> @Goetz: have you done this intentionally?
> >>>
> >>>> It will be a while before I can go through this in any detail.
> >>>>
> >>>> David
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 23/09/2016 3:52 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This change is part of the s390 port. It contains some basic adaptions
> >>>>> needed for a full hotspot port for linux s390x.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It defines the required macros, platform names and includes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The s390 port calles CodeCache::contains() in current_frame(), which
> is
> >>>>> used in NMT. As NMT already collects stack traces before the
> CodeCache
> >> is
> >>>>> initialized, contains() needs a check for this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    Wherever a row of platforms are listed, I sorted them alphabetically.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>    The jdk requires the file jvm.cfg.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please review. I please need a sponsor.
> >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-
> >> basic_s390/hotspot.wr01/
> >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-
> basic_s390/jdk.wr01/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>     Goetz.
> >>>>>