RFR/RFC: Non-PCH x86_32 build failure: err_msg is not defined

[Aleksey Shipilev]

Thanks!

I would like to push the patch in this form, even though there seems to be a build system bug [1]
that builds x86_64 in x86_32 config. It also makes sense to me, because sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp
uses err_msg defined in that header, and regular build seems to pass because we get that definition
transitively (which is fragile).

Any other opinions?

-Aleksey

[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200441

On 03/29/2018 08:02 PM, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
> The fix is of course ok, regardless of the x64 confusion.
> 
> ..Thomas
> 
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 6:21 PM, Aleksey Shipilev <shade at redhat.com <mailto:shade at redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Bug:
>      https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200438 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200438>
> 
>     Obvious fix:
> 
>     diff -r 5a757c0326c7 src/hotspot/cpu/x86/sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp
>     --- a/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp      Thu Mar 29 17:15:26 2018 +0200
>     +++ b/src/hotspot/cpu/x86/sharedRuntime_x86_64.cpp      Thu Mar 29 18:17:58 2018 +0200
>     @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
>      #include "runtime/sharedRuntime.hpp"
>      #include "runtime/vframeArray.hpp"
>      #include "utilities/align.hpp"
>     +#include "utilities/formatBuffer.hpp"
>      #include "vm_version_x86.hpp"
>      #include "vmreg_x86.inline.hpp"
>      #ifdef COMPILER1
> 
> 
>     The non-obvious part (and thus, "RFC") is why x86_64 build works fine in the same config. I don't
>     have the answer for that.
> 
>     Testing: x86_32 build
> 
>     Thanks,
>     -Aleksey
> 
>