RFR (XS): 8144881: Various fixes to linux/sparc

[Thomas Stüfe]

Hi guys,

On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 8:58 AM, Volker Simonis <volker.simonis at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Mikael,
>
> as David mentioned, your change should be synchronized with Thomas'
> change, who is currently cleaning up os::print_siginfo() (see:
>
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2015-December/017012.html
> ).
>
>
Thanks for considering me! But I think this does not conflict with my
change. Even if it does I can merge Mikaels changes in.


> Regarding your change, I can't understand the reason for including
> code/codeCache.hpp into all os_cpu/vm/os_<os>_<cpu>.cpp files. These
> files compiled fine until now, so why unnecessarily adding another
> dependency?
>
>
That would be my question too.

Kind Regards, Thomas


> Regards,
> Volker
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 6:21 AM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> wrote:
> > Mikael,
> >
> > I'll take a look at this asap but it likely conflicts with other changes
> > that Thomas Stufe has out for review wrt the signal handling code.
> >
> > I'm somewhat suspicious of the sudden need to change linux code just
> because
> > of the sparc port, however I shall reserve judgement for now :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/12/2015 9:16 AM, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Good control question! Since these are build problems, and since
> >> building on other platforms works today, making corresponding changes to
> >> files for other platforms is not strictly necessary, but for consistency
> >> it's of course reasonable to do so anyway. Here's an updated webrev
> >> doing exactly that:
> >>
> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8144881/webrev.01/webrev/
> >>
> >> Changes since webrev.00:
> >>
> >> * Copyright year updated (*grumble*)
> >> * Changes to print sigflags in check_signal_handler in os_linux.cpp were
> >> also applied to the other os_*.cpp files (where applicable)
> >> * code/codeCache.hpp included in all os_cpu/vm/os_<os>_<cpu>.cpp files
> >> (where applicable)
> >> * Added return statement to other JVM_handle_*_signal (where applicable)
> >> - these functions could *really* use some additional
> >> cleanup/unification...
> >> * Also: I noticed that the rest of the code in os_linux_sparc.cpp uses
> >> "sigcontext", as opposed to "struct sigcontext", so I dropped the
> "struct"
> >>
> >> Note: I'll have to build this again to make sure it still builds
> >> correctly across all the platforms, so consider this an optimistic
> >> webrev+review.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Mikael
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2015-12-07 14:19, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Mikael,
> >>>
> >>> The changes looks good for me, but
> >>>
> >>> Most of changes don't look as sparc-specific.
> >>>
> >>> Do you need to update other platforms as well?
> >>>
> >>> -Dmitry
> >>>
> >>> On 2015-12-08 00:53, Mikael Vidstedt wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Please review this small change which fixes a handful of places which
> >>>> currently lead to build failures on linux/sparc. The changes are all
> >>>> relatively straightforward and come in a few different flavors:
> >>>>
> >>>> * Incorrect format specifiers
> >>>> * "reaches end of function returning value"
> >>>> * wrong type name (sigcontext_t -> struct sigcontext)
> >>>> * wrong variable name (addr -> pc)
> >>>>
> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144881
> >>>> Webrev:
> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mikael/webrevs/8144881/webrev.00/webrev/
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Mikael
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/ppc-aix-port-dev/attachments/20151208/71c783cd/attachment.html>