[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: JDK-8198844 Clean up GensrcX11Wrappers

Magnus Ihse Bursie magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com
Mon Mar 5 23:30:49 UTC 2018

On 2018-03-05 23:38, Phil Race wrote:
> >I'm not sure what role the "verification" step we had before ever 
> played.
> >For all the years we've been "verifying" this, we've detected no 
> differences.
> I think this is useful in the event that you make some changes and
> regenerate the 64 bit sizes but not 32 bit.
That's a good point. I should add a warning message when regenerating 
the checked-in data files that you need to regenerate the files on both 
32 and 64 bit platforms.
> For example this old bug similarly reported a breakage on Solaris ..
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6804680
> ... back in the day when we only had that checked in and the ones used 
> for Linux
> were being generated on the fly. My reading of the history here is 
> sizes.32 and sizes.64
> were added to support cross-compilation, and the verification step 
> meant that  all
> architectures would get checked in some build or other.

I'd rather say that it was at this time that we stopped run-time 
generation of the X11 size data. The "verification" step was there more 
like a comfort thing for the build team, since we was too conservative.

> The clean up of removing the solaris specific seems like it could have 
> been
> done a long time ago .. I am not sure why was ever only this one case 
> there.
> I'd have to dig back a very long way.
> I do agree we do not need to support 32 + 64 bit concurrently, that went
> away when 64 bit solaris overlay on 32 bit was dropped.

Thank you.

Updated webrev with warning message about updating for all platforms:


(Only UpdateX11Wrappers.gmk has changed)


> -phil.
> On 03/02/2018 07:23 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Adding 2d-dev in the hopes of getting some input from component team. 
>> Seems like they should be aware of us removing the support for 
>> multiple data models.
>> Looks like you left a debug message at line 40 in GensrcX11Wrappers.gmk.
>> /Erik
>> On 2018-03-02 03:00, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>> On 2018-03-02 00:02, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> In xlibtypes.txt comment, should it be sizes-64.txt?
>>> Yes, good catch.
>>>> Generating both 32 and 64 seems a bit outdated at this point. 
>>>> Surely this is a remnant of bundling 64 and 32 bit together on 
>>>> Solaris in the past? Perhaps someone in 2d can answer this? Would 
>>>> be nice to be able to clean up that part as well if possible.
>>> Yes, you are right. We should clean up that as well. I was just too 
>>> conservative. I've now actually checked what happens when you 
>>> generate both 32 and 64 bit versions, and the result is that instead 
>>> of code like:
>>>     public static int getSize() { return 96; }
>>> we get code like this:
>>>     public static int getSize() { return ((XlibWrapper.dataModel == 
>>> 32)?(80):(96)); }
>>> Since we do no longer support multiple data models for the same 
>>> build, this is just unnecessary. In fact, that leads to an even 
>>> better cleanup, since we will always need just a single input file.
>>> I also wrapped the tool calls in ExecuteWithLog.
>>> Updated webrev:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8198844-clean-up-GensrcX11Wrappers/webrev.02 
>>> /Magnus

More information about the 2d-dev mailing list