Separating whitebox-api from jcstress-core - issues with 3rd-party libraries

[Aleksey Shipilev]

On 02/23/2017 01:29 PM, Jerzy Krolak wrote:
> 2017-02-23 11:58 GMT+01:00 Aleksey Shipilev <shade at redhat.com
> <mailto:shade at redhat.com>>:
>     ...and so was rejected by this mailing list.
> 
> 
> I'll re-post the original patch as .txt file - gmail should not interfere then.

Don't forget to submit OCA:
  http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/community/oca-486395.html

The patch looks non-trivial, so we should have OCA on file. Do this ASAP, to let
some time to process. Once filed, you would be all set for any future OpenJDK
contribution.


>     This raises deployment questions. We are targeting to always have a single JAR,
>     and putting whitebox.jar outside is an impediment for usability. I think putting
>     the compiled whitebox.jar into resources, dropping it to tempdir during the run,
>     and bootclasspath-ing it to forked JVM is a way to go.
> 
> 
> Seems trickier, but sounds like fun - I'll try to go ahead.
> 
> I'd be very happy to have the whitebox-api available separately, though.

Yeah. But Whitebox API is private Hotspot API. What we have right now works by
carefully matching what's in Hotspot now. I would hate to see the publicly
available Maven artifact for this.

Thanks,
-Aleksey