RFR: 8261966: macOS M1: report in hs_err log if we are running x86 code in emulation mode (Rosetta)

[Daniel D.Daugherty]

On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 14:54:17 GMT, Gerard Ziemski <gziemski at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In the bug report, @dholmes-ora mentions two different places where
>> "(EMULATED)" should show up.  This change covers the first:
>> 
>>> Host: MacBookPro17,1 x86_64 2400 MHz, 8 cores, 16G, Darwin 20.3.0
>>> 
>>> becomes
>>> 
>>> Host: MacBookPro17,1 x86_64 (EMULATED) 2400 MHz, 8 cores, 16G, Darwin 20.3.0 
>> 
>> but I don't think that it covers the second:
>> 
>>> CPU: total 8 (initial active 8) (1 cores per cpu, 1 threads per core) family 6 model 44 stepping 0 microcode 0x0, cmov, cx8, fxsr, mmx, sse, sse2, sse3, ssse3, sse4.1, sse4.2, popcnt, aes, clmul, tsc, tscinvbit, tscinv, clflush
>>> 
>>> becomes:
>>> 
>>> CPU: (EMULATED) total 8 (initial active 8) (1 cores per cpu, 1 threads per core) family 6 model 44 stepping 0 microcode 0x0, cmov, cx8, fxsr, mmx, sse, sse2, sse3, ssse3, sse4.1, sse4.2, popcnt, aes, clmul, tsc, tscinvbit, tscinv, clflush 
>> 
>> Am I missing something here?
>
> Thank you for the review Dan!
> 
>> In the bug report, @dholmes-ora mentions two different places where
>> "(EMULATED)" should show up. This change covers the first:
>> 
>> > Host: MacBookPro17,1 x86_64 2400 MHz, 8 cores, 16G, Darwin 20.3.0
>> > becomes
>> > Host: MacBookPro17,1 x86_64 (EMULATED) 2400 MHz, 8 cores, 16G, Darwin 20.3.0
>> 
>> but I don't think that it covers the second:
>> 
>> > CPU: total 8 (initial active 8) (1 cores per cpu, 1 threads per core) family 6 model 44 stepping 0 microcode 0x0, cmov, cx8, fxsr, mmx, sse, sse2, sse3, ssse3, sse4.1, sse4.2, popcnt, aes, clmul, tsc, tscinvbit, tscinv, clflush
>> > becomes:
>> > CPU: (EMULATED) total 8 (initial active 8) (1 cores per cpu, 1 threads per core) family 6 model 44 stepping 0 microcode 0x0, cmov, cx8, fxsr, mmx, sse, sse2, sse3, ssse3, sse4.1, sse4.2, popcnt, aes, clmul, tsc, tscinvbit, tscinv, clflush
>> 
>> Am I missing something here?
> 
> I wasn't sure the 2nd case was needed.
> 
> The 1st case shows the architecture, so it's clearly needed there.
> 
> In the 2nd case we just show CPU features, with no explicit mention of the architecture, so I didn't think it was 100% relevant there.
> 
> Is the opinion here that we need to mark it as `EMULATED` in both of these cases?

I would be okay if the second case was not tagged with "(EMULATED)", but
since @dholmes-ora made that comment in the bug report, you should wait
to hear from him.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3077