HotSpot 16 and OpenJDK6
Joseph D. Darcy
Joe.Darcy at Sun.COM
Wed Feb 24 12:28:06 PST 2010
Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 24 February 2010 16:42, Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com> wrote:
>
>> Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
>>
>>> Joe Darcy wrote:
>>>
>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 24 February 2010 00:28, Joe Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 23 February 2010 20:10, Joseph D. Darcy <Joe.Darcy at sun.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's the merge:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/jdk6-hs16-merge/webrev.01/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which now builds, thanks to this additional changeset from Daniel
>>>>>>>>> Daugherty in baseline:
>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/hsx/hsx16/baseline/rev/c9740f5ed5b4
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Good.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It also includes an additional fix, also listed separately at:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/jdk6-hs16-merge/webrev.02/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> which reverts an erroneous change from SIZE_FORMAT to %d in
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> changeset: 734:dbbe28fc66b5
>>>>>>>>> user: twisti
>>>>>>>>> date: Fri Feb 27 03:35:40 2009 -0800
>>>>>>>>> summary: 6778669: Patch from Red Hat -- fixes compilation errors
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> fixing the build on x86_64. We'll need a bug ID for this reversion.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The webrev generally looks good, but I have a few questions and
>>>>>>>> comments
>>>>>>>> before this goes back.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you know why webrev shows so many files with zero changes? I
>>>>>>>> assume
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> is an artifact of the merge.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, you're right that does seem strange. All I did was a pull from
>>>>>>> hs16 and then a merge. Perhaps this is some webrev oddity?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you look at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/2010-February/001230.html
>>>>>>> I included a diff of the merged OpenJDK6 against the hs16 master
>>>>>>> (which includes Daniel's patch that is currently only in baseline).
>>>>>>> It actually makes the other questions below a bit clearer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, that patch size is more manageable!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In hotspot_version, what are the semantics of JDK_PREVIOUS_VERSION?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure. It doesn't seem to do much. Its only use is to set a
>>>>>>> default BOOTDIR AFAICS:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> # Find JDK used for javac compiles
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BOOTDIR=$(SLASH_JAVA)/re/j2se/$(PREVIOUS_JDK_VERSION)/latest/binaries/$(PLATFORM)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (from hotspot/make/defs.make)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We actually differ from hs16 by still using 1.5.0 rather than 1.6.0.
>>>>>>> 1.5.0 implicitly seems to make more sense to me, because 1.6.0 is the
>>>>>>> version being built. But in practice, it doesn't seem to matter
>>>>>>> unless you're relying on the contents of a /java tree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a vague recollection of there being a particular reason why this
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> upgraded to 1.6.0 so I'd prefer to see this kept as 1.6.0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In terms of fixing the %d vs SIZE_FORMAT in vmError.cpp, I've filed
>>>>>>>> 6929005
>>>>>>>> "Fix format specifier in vmError.cpp." However, I notice that the
>>>>>>>> JDK 7
>>>>>>>> master still has %d in this location. I'll approve going back from
>>>>>>>> %d ->
>>>>>>>> SIZE_FORMAT in OpenJDK 6 conditional on the review and approval of a
>>>>>>>> HotSpot
>>>>>>>> engineer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting; I didn't check OpenJDK7 and indeed you're right. Looking
>>>>>>> again at the diff, it seems that we don't apply part of the same
>>>>>>> changeset:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- ../hs16/src/share/vm/utilities/vmError.hpp 2010-01-13
>>>>>>> 14:35:26.651211783 +0000
>>>>>>> +++ hotspot/src/share/vm/utilities/vmError.hpp 2010-02-17
>>>>>>> 11:07:40.899854566 +0000
>>>>>>> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // additional info for VM internal errors
>>>>>>> const char * _filename;
>>>>>>> - int _lineno;
>>>>>>> + size_t _lineno;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> // used by fatal error handler
>>>>>>> int _current_step;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> keeping the size_t rather than using int. So I'll change the fix to
>>>>>>> be making vmError.hpp match hs16 and OpenJDK7, rather than changing
>>>>>>> vmError.cpp.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The remaining diffs are typos and license fixups from the previous
>>>>>>> merge which need to go back to the main HotSpot tree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If vmError.hpp matches what is in JDK 7 and HS 16, I approve your merge
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> HS 16 + Dan's fixes into OpenJDK 6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Pushed. I reused 6929005 as Fix HS16 merge issues in OpenJDK 6 to
>>>>> make vmError.hpp and JDK_PREVIOUS_VERSION match hs16. You should
>>>>> probably update the bug itself to match :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> A fine use for that bug id; content of the bug adjusted accordingly :-)
>>>>
>>>> -Joe
>>>>
>>> Hmm, after syncing my repos and doing a build, I see test 2 HotSpot
>>> regression test failures
>>>
>>> * compiler/6823453/Test.java : DeoptimizeALot causes fastdebug server
>>> jvm to fail with assert(false,"unscheduable graph")
>>> * compiler/6833129/Test.java : Object.clone() and Arrays.copyOf ignore
>>> coping with -XX:+DeoptimizeALot
>>>
>>> both complaining of an unrecognized +DeoptimizeALot option.
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>> PS Some more testing results, after the HS update all the langtools tests
>> continue to pass and the jdk repo results are about the same.
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>
> Backported: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6/hotspot/rev/b13f90e8e0e5
> I took the opportunity to fix the author of the changeset and move
> cfang to Reviewed-by as it should have been in the first place:
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2009-September/002150.html
>
> Great to hear that the results are good! We did some testing with
> hs16 on IcedTea6 a while back and it improved the HotSpot results
> IIRC.
>
> I look into backporting Zero once I've fixed some issues with IcedTea
> and have it building OpenJDK6 hg.
>
Sounds good.
-Joe
More information about the jdk6-dev
mailing list