From gaetani at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 21:28:12 2016 From: gaetani at gmail.com (Fabiano Gaetani) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:28:12 -0300 Subject: Hello In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi folks, I'd like to contribute in this project. There's anything that I should have to do before starts? By the way, thanks in advance. Regards, -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From volker.simonis at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 17:49:18 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 19:49:18 +0200 Subject: RFR: JEP draft for Linux/s3990x port Message-ID: Hi, can you please review and endorse the following draft JEP for the integration of the Linux/s390x port into the jkd9 master repository: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166730 As detailed in the JEP, the Linux/s390x requires very few shared changes and we therefore don't foresee any impact on the existing platforms at all. Following you can find a short description of the planned changes: hotspot: ======= Out for review: 8166560: [s390] Basic enablement of s390 port. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-basic_s390/hotspot.wr01/ Reviewed: 8166562: C2: Suppress relocations in scratch emit. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166562-scratch_emit/webrev.01/ Will send RFR soon (depends on 8166560): 8166561: [s390] Adaptions needed for s390 port in C1 and C2. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166562-scratch_emit/webrev.01 We are still investigating the need of these shared changes: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000011-pass_PC_to_retAddrOffset.patch http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000016-constant_table_offset.patch And finally the patch with the s390x-only platform files. We are still editing these to get them into OpenJdk style and shape. Hotspot passes most jck, jtreg and spec tests with these. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000101-zFiles.patch top-level repository: =============== The following is just adding some s390x specific compiler flags to flags.m4 8166800: [s390] Top-level build changes required for Linux/s390x https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166800 jdk repository: ============ This one just adds a new jvm.cfg file for s390x 8166801: [s390] Add jvm.cfg file for Linux/s390x https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166801 And finally we plan to do one more change which fixes the jtreg test on Linux/s390x. But this is mainly for the correct detection of the platform and for excluding the tests which are not appropriate for s390x. Thank you and best regards, Volker From volker.simonis at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 16:55:21 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:55:21 +0200 Subject: RFR: JEP draft for Linux/s3990x port In-Reply-To: <72ddbd25-c7df-b02a-3827-d431f286c795@oracle.com> References: <72ddbd25-c7df-b02a-3827-d431f286c795@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Vladimir, thanks a lot for reviewing and endorsing the JEP. I've linked all the relevant issues to the JEP (they all have a link to a webrev) and change the state to "Submitted". There's just one more small shared change we need for the port for which we haven't opened a bug now because we are still working on simplifying it. The current version looks as follows: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/s390x/9000016-constant_table_offset.patch What are the next steps? Should I add a "jdk9-fc-request" label to t he JEP and add a corresponding "FC Extension Request" comment to it? Or will this be done automatically once I move it to "Candidate"? Is there anything left to do before I can move it to "Candidate" state? Thanks a lot and best regards, Volker On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > On 9/27/16 10:49 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> can you please review and endorse the following draft JEP for the >> integration of the Linux/s390x port into the jkd9 master repository: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166730 > > > Good. > Add links to webrevs in a comment. It will help to get umbrella FC extension > approval. > >> >> As detailed in the JEP, the Linux/s390x requires very few shared >> changes and we therefore don't foresee any impact on the existing >> platforms at all. Following you can find a short description of the >> planned changes: >> >> hotspot: >> ======= >> >> Out for review: >> 8166560: [s390] Basic enablement of s390 port. >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166560-basic_s390/hotspot.wr01/ >> >> Reviewed: >> 8166562: C2: Suppress relocations in scratch emit. >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166562-scratch_emit/webrev.01/ >> >> Will send RFR soon (depends on 8166560): >> 8166561: [s390] Adaptions needed for s390 port in C1 and C2. >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/8166562-scratch_emit/webrev.01 > > > Wrong link. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > >> >> We are still investigating the need of these shared changes: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000011-pass_PC_to_retAddrOffset.patch >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000016-constant_table_offset.patch >> >> And finally the patch with the s390x-only platform files. We are still >> editing these to get them into OpenJdk style and shape. >> Hotspot passes most jck, jtreg and spec tests with these. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr16/s390x_patch_queue/hotspot/9000101-zFiles.patch >> >> top-level repository: >> =============== >> >> The following is just adding some s390x specific compiler flags to >> flags.m4 >> 8166800: [s390] Top-level build changes required for Linux/s390x >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166800 >> >> jdk repository: >> ============ >> >> This one just adds a new jvm.cfg file for s390x >> 8166801: [s390] Add jvm.cfg file for Linux/s390x >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166801 >> >> >> And finally we plan to do one more change which fixes the jtreg test >> on Linux/s390x. But this is mainly for the correct detection of the >> platform and for excluding the tests which are not appropriate for >> s390x. >> >> Thank you and best regards, >> Volker >> >