[11u] RFC: Update Graal in OpenJDK 11 Updates?

[Langer, Christoph]

Hi Doug and Andrew,

thanks for bringing this discussion to the current point.

Unfortunately, I believe the latest replies from Doug didn't go to the list - but Andrew has cited them ��

So, I understand that the changes comprised by the big bulk change of labs-openjdk-11 - https://github.com/graalvm/labs-openjdk-11/commit/fbbdf5f15300716110d2ac9b9bd7f70b03b35a7d are first and foremost necessary to enable the usage of libgraal from the oracle/graal repo in JDK11. If OpenJDK 11 Updates doesn't have the changes, libgraal can't be used with it. Correct?

I also see a second potential motivation why OpenJDK 11 updates could be interested to incorporate those kind of changes. This is to be on par with the main Oracle JDK 11 Updates release. I think I mentioned that in my initial mail but it hasn't been part of the recent discussion between the both of you, Andrew and Doug. So, while we don't exactly know what Oracle did to their JDK11 Updates codebase, the backports of subsequent changes indicate that they must have incorporated something like the big bulk change of labs-openjdk-11. That would mean their in-tree Graal code of 11u is at the newer JDK13 level and hence the AOT and C2 replacement scenarios would have received those substantial updates.

On the other hand, I think for 11u we should be cautious and err on the side of stability. That would mean we deliberately don't pull those JVMCI and Graal updates into 11u. I think that's a bit the direction this discussion was moving to.

In any case, putting the general decision aside, I also believe, that the monolith commit is not the right way to get the changes into the OpenJDK 11 Updates project. When I was trying it on JDK11u, it was more of an exploration for me. But if we're going to do the exercise of updating Graal and JVMCI in OpenJDK11u to the JDK13 level, we should probably go change by change.

To enable this, I've created a JBS filter that contains all items Tom has mentioned in his list plus several Oracle 11.0.7 and 11.0.8 backports that we had to defer and which are not yet backported into JDK11u: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238758?filter=38696 

The list is sorted in descending order of commit time, so I guess if we process this list bottom up, we can probably achieve the current state JDK13 like state of labs-openjdk-11. Should some item be missing in this list, please let me know and I'll add it.

Best regards
Christoph


> -----Original Message-----
> From: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On
> Behalf Of Andrew Dinn
> Sent: Montag, 23. März 2020 18:52
> To: Doug Simon <doug.simon at oracle.com>
> Cc: Thomas Wuerthinger <thomas.wuerthinger at oracle.com>; jdk-updates-
> dev at openjdk.java.net; Tom Rodriguez <tom.rodriguez at oracle.com>
> Subject: Re: [11u] RFC: Update Graal in OpenJDK 11 Updates?
> 
> On 23/03/2020 16:56, Doug Simon wrote:
> > That is a good summary. Indeed, libgraal is only a compilation time and
> > resource optimization and thus not necessary for GraalVM.
> 
> Ok, glad to know I didn't misrepresent anything :-)
> 
> > Note that the JDK11 based Travis gates run on openjdk11
> > <https://github.com/oracle/graal/blob/master/.travis.yml#L17> so we
> > should recognize any regression of the GraalVM compiler there (as we
> > did recently
> > <https://github.com/oracle/graal/pull/2278#issuecomment-602513391>).
> > That said, also note that the Travis gate does not include any native
> > image tests. That would require use of open-labsjdk-11 for access to the
> > static libs.
> 
> Sure, we recognize that. You use of stockjdk11u in the gate is a great
> help. As for native image, Red Hat expects to be ramping up testing on
> OpenJDK jdk11u now that we are able to use it. So we should be able to
> catch issues and hopefully either suggest fixes them or, at least,
> report them back to you upstream in a timely fashion.
> 
> > It’s also worth pointing out that we’re also working with the HotSpot
> > team at Oracle to ensure any JVMCI change we’re pushing into 11 also
> > goes into JDK 15 where relevant.
> Yes of course and we appreciate that effort.
> 
> regards,
> 
> 
> Andrew Dinn
> -----------
> Senior Principal Software Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd
> Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
> Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill