RFR(S): 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
Lindenmaier, Goetz
goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com
Fri Jun 14 14:14:28 PDT 2013
Hi Vladimir,
> Did you got JBS notification about Part 2 and Part 3 bugs? I tried to
> use "share" feature.
> And I will file bugs for 4-5 later today.
No I didn't. Let's see what happens with 4, 5. But please mail the
bug-id to me so I don't have to wait for JBS until we are sure the
"share" feature works.
> I think, we (me or Albert when we get committer status) should do the
> sync because we need to sync closed parts also. It would be nice to do
> it at the same time and have check point (archived JPRT build) for that.
I think that's ok for now, but later I expect more risks on our code, and
then we should do it.
> I would prefer if all people who push into staging repos to have
> jcheck hook in their ~/.hgrc to avoid problems for all of us:
I have to disable jcheck if I push to our other repos because we have
no bugids there. I run it in general on the committed change and do
commit --amend if there is a problem. But when merging the last
time I found I can not do that on a merge changeset.
Besides that, if we are through with 2 and 3 I don't expect that
many effects on the closed ports any more. Only changes as adding
an empty function or the like.
Best regards,
Goetz.
>
> Best regards and thanks for the help so far,
> Goetz.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppc-aix-port-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net [mailto:ppc-aix-port-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Vladimir Kozlov
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:34 PM
> Cc: ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: RFR(S): 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
>
> Note, only PART 1 is ready to go.
>
> I will leave the honor to push first changeset to you, Goetz :)
>
> Please, make sure you use correct changeset header/descriptor and you pass jcheck (no trailing spaces etc):
>
> 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
> Summary: reenable CORE build on PPC64
> Reviewed-by: dholmes, kvn, coleenp
>
>
> About PART 2. Changes are good from reviewers point of view but we want to test closed bits on real PPC embedded
> hardware because you touched #ifdefs around related code. I will let you know the results.
>
> Thanks,
> Vladimir
>
> On 6/14/13 10:58 AM, Albert Noll wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> yes, the jprt job for part 1 + part 2 has just finished successfully.
>>
>> Best,
>> Albert
>>
>> On 14.06.2013 17:57, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>> This looks good. Albert tested it and I think it is ready to push.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Vladimir
>>>
>>> On 6/14/13 12:49 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I updated the webrev accordingly.
>>>> I'm checking for "ppc" and "64" now.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Goetz.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Vladimir Kozlov [mailto:vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com]
>>>> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 8:37 AM
>>>> To: David Holmes; Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>> Cc: ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.net; Chris Plummer; hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>> Subject: Re: RFR(S): 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
>>>>
>>>> Hi, Goetz
>>>>
>>>> I talked with David and we want you to add OS checks as generic_buildminimal1 does to avoid a confusion in future if
>>>> someone (as I did) try to build CORE on other platforms. CORE was one of our supported builds and someone can think that
>>>> this change will reenable it on all platforms which is not true.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Vladimir
>>>>
>>>> On 6/13/13 2:42 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>> On 6/13/13 3:47 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/06/2013 7:53 PM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I fixed the jvmg target and prepared a webrev:
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/webrevs/8016476-CORE/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for reviewing, Vladimir.
>>>>>>> I need a second reviewer, please.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So to clarify, this restores the old core targets but will only actually
>>>>>> work on the new ports? If so do we want to validate that in
>>>>>> generic_buildcore similar to the way we validate in generic_buildminimal1?
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be nice to have such validation but on other hand we don't have it for zero and shark, platforms which Oracle
>>>>> does not support. And core will not be in our official builds or supported.
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is a huge amount of cleanup I'd like to do in this makefile to
>>>>>> remove all the copy'n'paste duplication. :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net
>>>>>>> [mailto:hotspot-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Vladimir
>>>>>>> Kozlov
>>>>>>> Sent: Donnerstag, 13. Juni 2013 00:58
>>>>>>> To: Volker Simonis
>>>>>>> Cc: ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.net; Chris Plummer;
>>>>>>> hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, Volker
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 0001_fix_core_build.patch passed JPRT build/test run so it is good,
>>>>>>> consider reviewed (assuming you fix jvmgcore).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should we formalize the process to follow our normal openjdk review
>>>>>>> process? It will allow other people to see what is coming and to comment
>>>>>>> on it as you said and I agree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - I will file rfes and add Volker and Goetz to watch list so you get
>>>>>>> notifications (I hope) about rfes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - You submit webrev for reviews to ppc-aix-port-dev, hotspot-dev mail
>>>>>>> aliases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - We do reviews and small testing to make sure changes do not break our
>>>>>>> builds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - You prepare final patch with correct changeset header after we agree
>>>>>>> on changes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - I push it to staging repo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this acceptable to you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> About changeset header:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <bugid>: <synopsis-of-symptom>
>>>>>>> Summary: <summary-of-code-change>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: <reviewer>+
>>>>>>> Contributed-by: <contributor-email>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think you need "Contributed-by:" since Volker could be author.
>>>>>>> But it is up to you if you want to mention other contributors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
>>>>>>> Summary: reenable CORE build for Linux/PPC64 and AIX/PPC64
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: kvn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> PS: I filed next bug: PPC64 (part 2): Clean up PPC defines. Please,
>>>>>>> check that you get notification. You are on watch list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6/12/13 12:18 PM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>>>>>>>> Okay, I will add comment to the rfe that CORE target is only used on
>>>>>>>> Linux/PPC64 and AIX/PPC64 and Oracle will not support it (at least for
>>>>>>>> now).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/12/13 11:51 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>> <vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Goetz
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am perfectly fine with such granularity and I can start generating
>>>>>>>>>> RFEs.
>>>>>>>>>> I filed first:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 8016476: PPC64 (part 1): reenable CORE build
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Are you sure that 0001_fix_core_build.patch is complete? I can't
>>>>>>>>>> build it
>>>>>>>>>> on my Mac:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We haven't fixed the CORE build on all platforms. It should wok on
>>>>>>>>> Linux/PPC64 and AIX/PPC64 and not break anything else.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is the general approach we have taken. So I'm not sure what
>>>>>>>>> will be
>>>>>>>>> the best way for you to review the changes. But all of the patches
>>>>>>>>> from the
>>>>>>>>> first series of changes (1-9) won't probably do anything useful on
>>>>>>>>> Linux/x86 and Solaris because we haven't fixed the CORE build and
>>>>>>>>> the C++
>>>>>>>>> interpreter on that platforms. So building a CORE build or the C++
>>>>>>>>> interpreter on Linux/x86, Solaris or Mac will probably not succeed
>>>>>>>>> (and was
>>>>>>>>> not the scope of this project).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think the review for these patches should only make sure that they
>>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>>> break anything that worked before an any supported platforms (and
>>>>>>>>> trust us
>>>>>>>>> that they are good for our platforms:).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So in that sense "reenable CORE build" only means to provide the
>>>>>>>>> appropriate targets in the Makefiles and not the required source code
>>>>>>>>> fixes
>>>>>>>>> on all platforms (although they may be trivial/minimal). But if you'd
>>>>>>>>> absolutely also want to have a core build on Linux/x86 and Solaris,
>>>>>>>>> I can
>>>>>>>>> have a look at it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> gnumake[4]: *** No rule to make target `dtrace_stuff'. Stop.
>>>>>>>>>> gnumake[3]: *** [dtrace_stuff] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> gnumake[2]: *** [debugcore] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> gnumake[1]: *** [generic_buildcore] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>> gnumake: *** [debugcore] Error 2
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And on SPARC:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/runtime/globals.**hpp", line 170: Error: Multiple
>>>>>>>>>> declaration for pd_InlineSmallCode.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And you should used debugcore instead of jvmgcore:
>>>>>>>>>> +all_debugcore: jvmgcore docs export_debug
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I want your changes be perfect from the start ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You're right. The renaming of the 'jvmg' target to 'debug' has happened
>>>>>>>>> recently (
>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/hsx/hotspot-main/hotspot/rev/f36e073d56a4) and
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> we haven't adapted it. We will fix this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And I need to discuss with our embedded group about
>>>>>>>>>> 0002_PPC_defines.patch
>>>>>>>>>> because it affects them. It may take time.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/13 8:39 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vladimir,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> yes, the plan is that each is self contained. When I set up the
>>>>>>>>>>> patches I
>>>>>>>>>>> built and jckecked each. When I updated them I only built them
>>>>>>>>>>> selectively,
>>>>>>>>>>> so there might be minor issues. I had planned to assure this once I
>>>>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>>>>> webrevs from the patches.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Some of them might apply in any order, but others depend on previous
>>>>>>>>>>> ones,
>>>>>>>>>>> e.g., 0009 containing the ppc files will not work without the changes
>>>>>>>>>>> before.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The patches work with hs25-b34.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please tell me if I can do anything to ease your reviewing.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ah, I just saw your mail about closed code ... I tried to keep
>>>>>>>>>>> changes necessary to other platform code to a minimum, but also tried
>>>>>>>>>>> to avoid strange workarounds. Therefore I for example did change
>>>>>>>>>>> 0002
>>>>>>>>>>> renaming the PPC defines, see the comment there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you agree with the granularity of the changes, it would be great
>>>>>>>>>>> if you
>>>>>>>>>>> could generate bug-ids for them. Maybe at least for the changes
>>>>>>>>>>> up to 0016?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>> From: Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:vladimir.kozlov@**oracle.com<vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Mittwoch, 12. Juni 2013 17:03
>>>>>>>>>>> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>>>>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>>>>>>> ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.**net<ppc-aix-port-dev at openjdk.java.net>;
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net; Volker Simonis; Azeem Jiva; Chris
>>>>>>>>>>> Plummer
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you, Goetz.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Can I review just 1 patch (for example, 1 from first 1-9), merge it
>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> jdk8 and build? Or I should do review all 1-9
>>>>>>>>>>> patches and merge them together into jdk8 to be able build? In
>>>>>>>>>>> short, is
>>>>>>>>>>> each patch self-contain?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/12/13 7:44 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> With my recent changes I removed some of the problems Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>> mentioned.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I also added the patches queue I maintain into our jdk8/hotspot
>>>>>>>>>>>> repository,
>>>>>>>>>>>> at hotspot/ppc_patches.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Applied to the staging hotspot directory, the linuxppc and aixppc
>>>>>>>>>>>> hotspots
>>>>>>>>>>>> can be built.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The queue contains the changes proposed by me before, with minor
>>>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>>> due
>>>>>>>>>>>> to recent development:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1-9 linuxppc C-interpreter port (In our plan milestone M2.1)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 11-15 aixppc C-interpreter port (In our plan milestone M2.2)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 101-107 C-interpreter improvements
>>>>>>>>>>>> 111-122 ppc C2 compiler port leading to a vm rudimentarily working
>>>>>>>>>>>> 200-217 C2 compiler fixes, extensions etc needed for a stable and
>>>>>>>>>>>> performant ppc port.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Altogether currently 49 changes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Our plan was to propose the changes in the order of the queue for
>>>>>>>>>>>> review. I'm happy to create webrevs for any of them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir, maybe the queue simplifies reviewing the port, as the
>>>>>>>>>>>> changes
>>>>>>>>>>>> are more complete. They include all later improvements by fixes or
>>>>>>>>>>>> adaptions in merge changes.
>>>>>>>>>>>> For why and where I renamed PPC to PPC32 see the second change in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> queue.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> PS: This can be used as the invokedynamic repository:
>>>>>>>>>>>> hg clone
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**ppc-aix-port/jdk8/hotspot<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/ppc-aix-port/jdk8/hotspot>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ppc-hotspot
>>>>>>>>>>>> hg clone
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**ppc-aix-port/stage/hotspot<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/ppc-aix-port/stage/hotspot>stage-hotspot
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> cd stage-hotspot
>>>>>>>>>>>> ln -s .../ppc-hotspot/ppc_patches/ .hg/patches
>>>>>>>>>>>> hg qpush -a
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:vladimir.kozlov@**oracle.com<vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 11. Juni 2013 18:34
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Lindenmaier, Goetz
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: Volker Simonis; Azeem Jiva; Chris Plummer
>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Here is result of my first attempt to build/test ppc changes
>>>>>>>>>>>> together
>>>>>>>>>>>> with our closed sources.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Small problems:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/memory/**allocation.hpp:209: Trailing whitespace
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/memory/**allocation.inline.hpp:121: Trailing whitespace
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/opto/escape.cpp:**2207: Trailing whitespace
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/memory/**allocation.hpp:212: Trailing whitespace
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/opto/escape.cpp:**2214: Trailing whitespace
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Build on MacOS:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/opto/**callGenerator.cpp: In member function 'virtual
>>>>>>>>>>>> JVMState* VirtualCallGenerator::**generate(JVMState*)':
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/opto/**callGenerator.cpp:204: error:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'zero_page_read_protected' is not a member of 'os'
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> agent/src/os/bsd/**MacosxDebuggerLocal.m:54:2: error: #error
>>>>>>>>>>>> UNSUPPORTED_ARCH
>>>>>>>>>>>> agent/src/os/bsd/**MacosxDebuggerLocal.m:167:4: error: #error
>>>>>>>>>>>> UNSUPPORTED_ARCH
>>>>>>>>>>>> agent/src/os/bsd/**MacosxDebuggerLocal.m:591:2: error: #error
>>>>>>>>>>>> UNSUPPORTED_ARCH
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We have several conflict with closed sources builds:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/utilities/**elfSymbolTable.cpp: In member function
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'bool
>>>>>>>>>>>> ElfSymbolTable::lookup(**unsigned char*, int*, int*, int*)':
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/utilities/**elfSymbolTable.cpp:97: error: comparison
>>>>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>>>> signed and unsigned integer expressions
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/utilities/**elfSymbolTable.cpp:124: error: comparison
>>>>>>>>>>>> between
>>>>>>>>>>>> signed and unsigned integer expressions
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> error: no 'oopDesc** frame::interpreter_frame_**mirror_addr() const'
>>>>>>>>>>>> member function declared in class 'frame'
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> error: no matching function for call to
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'SharedRuntime::c_calling_**convention(BasicType*&, VMRegPair*&,
>>>>>>>>>>>> uint&)'
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it is due to changes like next:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> -#ifdef PPC
>>>>>>>>>>>> +#ifdef PPC32
>>>>>>>>>>>> oop* interpreter_frame_mirror_addr(**) const;
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Next is easy fix in our closed sources but it requires efforts from
>>>>>>>>>>>> our
>>>>>>>>>>>> side:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/prims/**methodHandles.cpp: In static member function
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'static
>>>>>>>>>>>> void MethodHandles::generate_**adapters()':
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/prims/**methodHandles.cpp:68: error:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'adapter_code_size'
>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot be used as a function
>>>>>>>>>>>> src/share/vm/prims/**methodHandles.cpp:70: error:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 'adapter_code_size'
>>>>>>>>>>>> cannot be used as a function
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I would suggest to do such shared changes which affects different
>>>>>>>>>>>> builds
>>>>>>>>>>>> later after initial push.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/13 3:20 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Vladimir,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I updated the repo to jdk8-b92. Our nightly tests built and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tested it successfully. In case you experience any problems
>>>>>>>>>>>>> please tell me the details so I can fix them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Goetz.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~**simonis/ppc-aix-port/index.**html<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/ppc-aix-port/index.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [mailto:vladimir.kozlov@**oracle.com<vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Dienstag, 4. Juni 2013 20:58
>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: Simonis, Volker
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: Iris Clark; Wintergerst, Michael; Lindenmaier, Goetz; Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com; Tim Ellison; Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bateman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Volker,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you or someone update
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**ppc-aix-port/jdk8/hotspot<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/ppc-aix-port/jdk8/hotspot>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> match latest
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sources in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/**jdk8/jdk8/hotspot<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/hotspot>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just tried to merge them and build Hotspot on x86 without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/4/13 7:04 AM, Simonis, Volker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We intentionally used 'porters-dev' rather
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than'ppc-aix-port-dev' in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning to address a broader audience for the initial
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I'm happy to change that back to 'ppc-aix-port-dev' now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Volker
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Iris Clark [iris.clark at oracle.com]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 04, 2013 3:50 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Simonis, Volker; Wintergerst, Michael; Lindenmaier, Goetz;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt; Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com; Tim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ellison;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iris.clark at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* Alan Bateman; Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Volker.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry about this, one more thing about the JEP...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that the "Discussion" list probably needs to be updated
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> your Project's mailing list (ppc-aix-port-dev). Right now it's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> listed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as porters-dev.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> iris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:*Simonis, Volker [mailto:volker.simonis at sap.com**]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 04, 2013 12:12 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Iris Clark; Wintergerst, Michael; Lindenmaier, Goetz;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt; Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com; Tim
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ellison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* Alan Bateman; Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Iris,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're right, the title is too clumsy - I just couldn't come up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> something better yesterday in the evening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "PowerPC/AIX Port" sounds good to me. If nobody complains, I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Volker
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:*Iris Clark [iris.clark at oracle.com]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 04, 2013 2:57 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Simonis, Volker; Wintergerst, Michael; Lindenmaier, Goetz;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt; Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:luchsh at cn.ibm.com>; Tim Ellison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* Alan Bateman; Vladimir Kozlov; iris.clark at oracle.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:iris.clark at oracle.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Volker.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just updated the JEP according to your suggestions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not a Reviewer however, I think that the phrase "OpenJDK
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> master
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories" in the revised title is not ideal:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/jep-175.md Mon May 27 23:22:51 2013 +0400
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/jep-175.md Mon Jun 03 18:51:18 2013 +0200
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JEP: 175
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Title: Integrate PowerPC/AIX Port into JDK 8
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +Title: Integrate the PowerPC/AIX Port into the OpenJDK master
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Author: Volker Simonis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Organization: SAP AG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Created: 2013/1/11
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thinking out loud, what about just "PowerPC/AIX Port"? JEPs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about adding features to JDK Release Projects. There are lots of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> examples of JEPs [1] which don't begin with verbs, e.g. "133:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unicode
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6.2", "148: Small VM", "172: DocLint", etc. The JEP itself
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> additional details.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps others have suggestions?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am I right with my assumption that the targeted release will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK 8 (or 9/8u respectively) but that the targeted release will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the "Release" header field of the JEP by the OpenJDK Lead (as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specified in the JEP specification)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. Once that field is populated, the value will appear in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the JEP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> index [1], see the third column.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iris
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:*Simonis, Volker [mailto:volker.simonis at sap.com**]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Monday, June 03, 2013 10:10 AM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Iris Clark; Wintergerst, Michael; Lindenmaier, Goetz;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt; Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:luchsh at cn.ibm.com>; Tim Ellison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* Alan Bateman; Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* RE: JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just updated the JEP according to your suggestions. Please
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> find
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the new version attached to this mail (I haven't checked the new
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in until now to give everybody a chance to comment on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am I right with my assumption that the targeted release will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK 8 (or 9/8u respectively) but that the targeted release will
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be set
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the "Release" header field of the JEP by the OpenJDK Lead (as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specified in the JEP specification)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In addition to the changes proposed by you I've added the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contents of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the "Approach" section from Azeems "PPCAIX plan" to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Description"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section of the JEP. I've also added links to the new "PowerPC/AIX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Port
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration Plan" [2] of our "PowerPC/AIX Port OpenJDK Wiki
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Space" [3]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the JEP.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The "PowerPC/AIX Port Integration Plan" in the Wiki is intended
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to hold
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Azeems "PPCAIX plan" document.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Iris: could you please somehow arrange to give Azeem editing
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rights to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that page?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Azeem: could you please be so kind to past the contents of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "PPCAIX
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan" into that page (once you have the appropriate rights)? I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> saw that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the document is created from an Atlassian Confluence Wiki anyway
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my unlimited naivety I imagine this could be a simple
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> copy-and-paste
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> operation:) If that doesn't work so easily, please let me know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could help.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there are no objections I plan to checkin the new version of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the JEP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tomorrow after our telephone call.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thank you and best regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Volker
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/**pages/viewpage.action?pageId=**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 13729959<https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=13729959>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3]:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/**display/PPCAIXPort<https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/PPCAIXPort>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:*Iris Clark [iris.clark at oracle.com]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 31, 2013 8:48 PM
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Wintergerst, Michael; Simonis, Volker; Lindenmaier, Goetz;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bernard
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traversat; Jeannette Hung; Azeem Jiva; David Therkelsen; Mikael
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vidstedt; Neil Richards; Steve Poole; luchsh at cn.ibm.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <mailto:luchsh at cn.ibm.com>; Tim Ellison
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* iris.clark at oracle.com <mailto:iris.clark at oracle.com>**; Alan
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bateman; Vladimir Kozlov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* JEP 175 - Review comments
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Volker.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JEP 175: Integrate PowerPC/AIX Port into JDK 8
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/**175
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/175>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We're actively working to get your JEP to Funded. We had a few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comments:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Recommend that "8" be removed from the JEP title, etc.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Recommend that the first Motivation bullet clearly indicate that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only covering PPC/AIX.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Recommend that the second Motivation bullet be modified to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clear that it applies to Hotspot only.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Instructions for editing the JEP may be found in the "Mechanics"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section at the bottom of JEP 1 [1].)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vladimir Kozlov (VM) and Alan Bateman (Core Libraries) are lined
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be the JEP's reviewers. Once they're satisfied with your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes/feedback they'll add themselves to the JEP's "Reviewed-by"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Iris Clark
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
More information about the ppc-aix-port-dev
mailing list