RFR (S) 8224020: AsyncGetCallTrace test should not run on PPC64 or IA64

[Volker Simonis]

Hi Jc,

from the perspective of the ppc64 and s390 port it is OK to exclude
the two platforms from the test. When we will fix AGCT on the two
platforms we will update the tests.

Thanks,
Volker

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 4:57 AM Jean Christophe Beyler
<jcbeyler at google.com> wrote:
>
> Hi both,
>
> For the linux question, I was doing that less for the AGCT code itself but more for the dlsym I was doing in the test; I was not really wanting to support the various ways of getting the function pointer in the first iteration of the test. If we wanted to add it, I would prefer to do a separate bug/webrev to add it in a second step (For example, my theory is that dlsym works on mac but I'm not sure of the support there either).
>
> I like the idea of trying to only know what architectures are supported. >From what I can tell, if I restrain my inspection to linux:
>
> For the linux ports and pd_get_top_frame_for_signal_handler:
>   - aarch64, arm, ppc, sparc, x86 seem to have an implementation (or it calls the for_profiling_one)
>   - zero, s390 do not
>
> On the AsyncGetCallTrace itself, it seems like the #ifndef around the call that removes ppc64/ia64 is what is blocking it for ppc at least.
>
> Which means that on linux, we should remove zero, s390, ia64, and ppc64; or as you are suggesting allow aarch64, arm, sparc, and x86.
>
> I offer thus:
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8224020/webrev.01/
> Bug:  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224020
>
> Thanks for the reviews!
> Jc
>
>
>
> From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
> Date: Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:44 PM
> To: Chris Plummer, Jean Christophe Beyler, OpenJDK Serviceability
>
>> Hi Jc,
>>
>> I'm Okay with this fix in general modulo some suggestion from Chris below.
>>
>>
>> On 5/15/19 18:49, Chris Plummer wrote:
>>
>> Hi JC,
>>
>> Looks like s390 is also not supported. Do we know for usre if it is implemented on other architectures, like aarch64? I wouldn't necessarily rely on the lack of a negative comment in JavaThread::pd_get_top_frame_for_signal_handler() to determine support. Maybe the test should list supported platforms rather than unsupported ones.
>>
>>
>> I like the suggestion above.
>> It is better to list what is supported now.
>>
>> Also, why does the test currently require linux?
>>
>>
>> My guess is that Jc does not have other platforms to check it on.
>> Probably, it is Okay for now to keep it this way.
>> Then we could file an RFE, check if ASGCT tests work Okay on other OS'es and relax this limitation.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Serguei
>>
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> On 5/15/19 6:01 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Could I get a review that restricts the test to not run on PPC64/IA64 please?
>>
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8224020
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8224020/webrev.00/
>>
>> I also moved NULL -> RTLD_DEFAULT as the man page on linux does not specify the behavior of passing NULL.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jc
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
> Jc