On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:19:24 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> > Was this always redundant, and does removing it make no change to current
> > build options?
> > If so, great, let's remove the useless makefile lines.
>
> There was a bit of discussion before in the thread
> https://mail.openjdk.or
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 11:54:29 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> Is it worth making any change here?
This was needed because I removed
DISABLED_WARNINGS_gcc_VMManagementImpl.c
while changing the makefile.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23966#discussion_r1989296776
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:04:59 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
>> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit sin
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:18:55 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> Windows fastdebug and release I just checked and saw -O1, I'm not sure why
> that is.
The change touches only Linux so Windows stays as it is.
> We do the same thing in make/modules/jdk.management/Lib.gmk so both these
> management locati
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:14:16 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
>> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit sin
On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 10:39:27 GMT, snake66 wrote:
> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that it's
> possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags for
> enabling posix threads.
>
> This work is a continuation of the work done by Greg Lewis in
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:04:58 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> Remove a compiler directive to avoid unused var warnings, but change the code
> to make it imply a method has no return value when actually it returns a
> value: I think you could argue this either way, so I asked if it's really
> worthwhi
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 15:04:58 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> Was this always redundant, and does removing it make no change to current
> build options?
> If so, great, let's remove the useless makefile lines.
There was a bit of discussion before in the thread
https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 18:51:53 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> make/modules/java.management/Lib.gmk line 33:
>>
>>> 31: ## Build libmanagement
>>> 32:
>>>
>>> 33:
>>
>> Why remove the comment header. This pattern i
> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Bring back comment
-
Changes
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025 13:39:44 GMT, snake66 wrote:
>> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that
>> it's possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags
>> for enabling posix threads.
>>
>> This work is a continuation of the work done by Greg Lew
On Sat, 8 Mar 2025 13:39:44 GMT, snake66 wrote:
>> Replace hardcoded instances of `-lpthread` with `$(LIBPTHREAD)`, so that
>> it's possible to parameterize this for platforms that use different flags
>> for enabling posix threads.
>>
>> This work is a continuation of the work done by Greg Lew
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 13:36:42 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> src/java.management/share/native/libmanagement/VMManagementImpl.c line 63:
>>
>>> 61: {
>>> 62: jmmOptionalSupport mos;
>>> 63: jmm_interface->GetOptionalSupport(env, &mos);
>>
>> Is it worth making any change here?
>>
>> We
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:04:59 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
>> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit sin
> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Adjust jdk.management/Lib.gmk
---
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 14:14:16 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
>> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit sin
On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
-
Commit messages:
- JDK-8351542
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23966/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23966&ran
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 00:18:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> What is the intended way of using this? Do you run make with
>>> LIBPTHREAD=-pthread or do you apply a patch on libraries.m4 for the
>>> specific way of linking to pthread?
>>
>> This is in preparation of the upcoming BSD port, which use
Allows for future support for platforms that require different flags for
libiconv support.
Sponsored-by: The FreeBSD Foundation
-
Commit messages:
- 8351323: Parameterize libiconv compiler and linker flags
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23995/files
Webrev: https://web
On Mon, 10 Mar 2025 17:32:07 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> On Linux there are some special settings for LIBMANAGEMENT_OPTIMIZATION that
>> are most likely not needed any more and could be removed.
>
> make/modules/java.management/Lib.gmk line 33:
>
>> 31: ## Build libmanagement
>> 32:
>> ##
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:35:45 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Allows for future support for platforms that require different flags for
>> libiconv support.
>>
>> Sponsored-by: The FreeBSD Foundation
>
> I think this looks ok, but please wait for Magnus to have a look too.
@erikj79 Thanks for the r
On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:22:34 GMT, snake66 wrote:
> Allows for future support for platforms that require different flags for
> libiconv support.
>
> Sponsored-by: The FreeBSD Foundation
I think this looks ok, but please wait for Magnus to have a look too.
-
Marked as reviewed by e
On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 01:46:37 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix implements streaming output support for attach protocol.
>> See JBS issue for evaluation, summary of the changes in the 1st comment.
>> Testing: tier1..4,hs-tier5-svc
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull request incrementally with one
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 17:08:21 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> We calculate a size (length of the counter in characters), which might be
> '\Process(java#0)% Processor Time', 33 chars.
Isn't that 32 characters?
I understood the rest of the explanation in this PR and the change sounds
reasonable to me.
24 matches
Mail list logo
