Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u

Mario Torre neugens at redhat.com
Wed Jan 30 09:13:32 UTC 2019


Yeah, however I think we may need to be conservative with this, since the
stability of the platform has precedence over new features, so we need to
find some way to have a staging environment for those changes.

Cheers,
Mario

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:37 AM guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com> wrote:

> Good suggestion! Paul
>
> Thanks,
> Guangyu
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sender:Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com>
> Sent At:2019 Jan. 29 (Tue.) 23:58
> Recipient:guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com>; Mario Torre <
> neugens at redhat.com>
> Cc:jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net>; yumin qi <
> yumin.qi at gmail.com>; kingsum.chow <kingsum.chow at gmail.com>; jdk8u-dev <
> jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>; denghui.ddh <denghui.ddh at antfin.com>
> Subject:Re: Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u
>
>
> Another possibility is to push this base version, then explicitly backport bug fixes. We get something that works sooner, and the fixes are a lot easier to triage if there are problems with them.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
>  On 1/29/19, 4:12 AM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of guangyu.zhu" <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net on behalf of guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com
> > wrote:
>
>     Of course. Finally, we should also port all bug fixes.
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Sender:Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com>
>     Sent At:2019 Jan. 29 (Tue.) 20:04
>     Recipient:guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com>
>     Cc:Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>; Mario Torre <
> neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com>; jdk8u-dev <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net>; yumin qi <yumin.qi at gmail.com
> >; kingsum.chow <kingsum.chow at gmail.com>; jdk8u-dev <
> jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>; denghui.ddh <denghui.ddh at antfin.com>
>     Subject:Re: Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u
>
>
>     Ok, I think we need to research the other fixes and perhaps implement them in the patch then, nevertheless, this is good for a preliminary discussion.
>
>     Cheers,
>     Mario
>
>     On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:59 PM guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com
> > wrote:
>
>     not yet. In fact, this backport contains only one bug fix -
>
>     commit 62afd4e82318a9912d087a30b275f63d3ae9be55
>     Author: mgronlun <none at none>
>     Date:   Wed May 23 15:21:54 2018 +0200
>
>         8203457: Add back missing full buffer notification
>         Reviewed-by: redestad, sjohanss
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Sender:Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com>
>     Sent At:2019 Jan. 29 (Tue.) 19:48
>     Recipient:guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com>
>     Cc:Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>; Mario Torre <
> neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com>; jdk8u-dev <
> jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net>; yumin qi <yumin.qi at gmail.com
> >; kingsum.chow <kingsum.chow at gmail.com>; jdk8u-dev <
> jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>; denghui.ddh <denghui.ddh at antfin.com>
>     Subject:Re: Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u
>
>
>     Btw, I do have a question already, there were a few fixed after JEP328_FlightRecorder was pushed, I asusme you have back ported them too and are part of this patch?
>
>     Cheers,
>     Mario
>
>     On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:45 PM Mario Torre <neugens at redhat.com
> > wrote:
>     Thanks!
>
>
>     I'll help with the review, it may take a few days since I'm totally absorbed by FOSDEM right now. Btw, is any of you coming?
>
>     Cheers,
>     Mario
>
>     On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:42 PM guangyu.zhu <guangyu.zhu at aliyun.com
> > wrote:
>     Hi there,
>
>
>      JFR backport patch has been uploaded to cr.openjdk. Please have a review for the patch.
>
>      Webrev:
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/hs_jfr_cr/
>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/jdk_jfr_cr/
>
>      The original patch comes from webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mgronlun/JEP328_FlightRecorder/Preview/webrev/index.html
>  . We ported it to jdk8u192-b26 and passed most of the jfr jtreg tests on Linux/x86-64 platform. Some features related to Module, AOT and log level are removed because jdk8 does not support them.
>
>
>      We have added a new option ‘EnableJFR’ to enable or disable the JFR feature. It’s disabled by default. To enable it, you can start java with ‘-XX:+EnableJFR’.  For example:
>
>      java -XX:+EnableJFR -XX:StartFlightRecording=duration=1m,filename=rec.jfr MyApp
>
>
>      When running the jtreg test, please add the extra option '-vmoption:-XX:+EnableJFR'. Otherwise the test case will not execute correctly. Here is an example of running jfr jtreg test:
>
>      make test JTREG_TEST_EXTRA_OPTIONS=-vmoption:-XX:+EnableJFR TEST=jdk_jfr
>
>
>      There is one more thing worth noting, please use jmc version 7.0 or later to open the jfr record file.
>
>      Your suggestions and comments are welcome.
>
>      Thanks,
>      Guangyu Zhu
>      ------------------------------------------------------------------
>      Sender:李三红(三红) <sanhong.lsh at alibaba-inc.com>
>      Sent At:2018 Dec. 17 (Mon.) 21:21
>      Recipient:Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>; Mario Torre <
> neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com>
>      Cc:jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>      Subject:Re: Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u
>
>      Thanks for comments, we are preparing our internal patches for webrev.
>
>      In the meantime, Martijn/ Andrew mentioned we can use AdoptOpenJDK to produce technical preview build.
>      Would like to know this... can Martijn point us some guide somewhere?
>
>      Thanks!
>      Sanhong
>      -----邮件原件-----
>      发件人: Andrew Haley [mailto:aph at redhat.com]
>      发送时间: 2018年12月13日 3:03
>      收件人: Mario Torre <neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com>; 李三红(三红) <
> sanhong.lsh at alibaba-inc.com>
>      抄送: Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com>;
> jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net
>      主题: Re: Proposal for back-porting JFR to OpenJDK8u
>
>      On 12/12/18 1:44 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
>
>      > I think the first thing to do would be to post the patch for review, a
>
>      > shared repository would make the review process a bit more complex I
>
>      > think, and only makes sense if there is a need to work further on the
>      > patch collectively.
>
>
>      Yes, exactly. That's the normal process, and it's the best place to start.
>
>      --
>      Andrew Haley
>      Java Platform Lead Engineer
>      Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
>      EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
>
>
>
>     --
>     Mario Torre
>     Associate Manager, Software Engineering
>     Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
>     9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898
>
>
>     --
>     Mario Torre
>     Associate Manager, Software Engineering
>     Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
>     9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898
>
>
>
>     --
>     Mario Torre
>     Associate Manager, Software Engineering
>     Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
>     9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898
>
>
>
>

-- 
Mario Torre
Associate Manager, Software Engineering
Red Hat GmbH <https://www.redhat.com>
9704 A60C B4BE A8B8 0F30  9205 5D7E 4952 3F65 7898


More information about the jdk8u-dev mailing list