8203287: Zero fails to build after JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder)

[Doerr, Martin]

Hi Severin,

I'd prefer to push PPC64/s390 first because it contains the final solution.
If you want to push earlier, please just omit the change to os_perf_linux.cpp.
Or you can change that file to the final solution. I'd be fine with that, too.

Best regards,
Martin


-----Original Message-----
From: Aleksey Shipilev [mailto:shade at redhat.com] 
Sent: Mittwoch, 16. Mai 2018 17:40
To: Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com>; Doerr, Martin <martin.doerr at sap.com>; hotspot-dev <hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: 8203287: Zero fails to build after JDK-8199712 (Flight Recorder)

On 05/16/2018 05:38 PM, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Hi Martin, Aleksey,
> 
> On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 17:08 +0200, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> On 05/16/2018 05:04 PM, Doerr, Martin wrote:
>>> JDK-8203288 contains a change of os_perf_linux.cpp using:
>>> #include CPU_HEADER(vm_version_ext)
>>> (See http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mdoerr/8203288_ppc64_s390_build/webrev.00/)
>>>
>>> Can you check if that works for you, please?
> 
> That works, thanks!
> 
> How do you want to coordinate getting both patches integrated? Shall I
> wait for your change to get integrated or should I get it in as is
> first and you'll resolve the merge conflict changing to your version in
> os_perf_linux.cpp?

Personally, I'd prefer PPC64/S390 to go in first, because it makes more sense to have CPU_HEADER.
Then Zero can piggyback on it.

-Aleksey