RFR : 8211213: fix aix build after 8196341: Add JFR events for parallel phases of G1
matthias.baesken at sap.com
Thu Sep 27 14:39:56 UTC 2018
Hi Thomas, do you know some fast and helpful person who can bring the INCLUDE_JFR and ! INCLUDE_JFR cases in sync ?
(or maybe there was a reason to have these differences we observe ? )
Best regards, Matthias
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Schatzl <thomas.schatzl at oracle.com>
> Sent: Donnerstag, 27. September 2018 16:32
> To: Baesken, Matthias <matthias.baesken at sap.com>; 'hotspot-
> dev at openjdk.java.net' <hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net>; 'build-
> dev at openjdk.java.net' <build-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: Re: RFR : 8211213: fix aix build after 8196341: Add JFR events for
> parallel phases of G1
> On Thu, 2018-09-27 at 14:16 +0000, Baesken, Matthias wrote:
> > Small update - while my change fixes the build issues on
> > AIX (and maybe also the issues on zero) ,
> > My comment that the AIX compiler xlc12 is guilty was most likely
> > wrong .
> > What happens, is that INCLUDE_JFR is not set on AIX (means :
> > jfr is disabled on this platform).
> > However , in the generated file jfrEventClasses.hpp ,
> > We have different classes for the
> > cases INCLUDE_JFR and not INCLUDE_JFR .
> > The not INCLUDE_JFR - versions of the classes only have the
> > commit() method without params , and the set*-methods :
> > [...]
> > * Should the generator be changed to generate the missing
> > methods in both cases ?
> > * Or should in non-JFR case the complete event coding be
> > removed/guarded by macros ?
> I would prefer the former as the latter just adds more clutter, i.e.
More information about the hotspot-dev