On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 07:02:04 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:48:25 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove UBSAN_ENABLED From spec.gmk.in
>
> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 38:
>
>> 36:
>> 37: #ifdef U
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 06:47:44 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Yeah, it is unfortunate. However there is no other way to actually set the
>> defaults nicely. The other alternative is to use environment variables, but
>> they are easy to forget when invoking the launcher manually.
>
> Does the env-var
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:59:19 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> behav
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:51:52 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 37:
>>
>>> 35: #include "jni.h"
>>> 36:
>>> 37: #ifdef UNDEFINED_BEHAVIOR_SANITIZER
>>
>> I really do not like having to make source code changes to accommodate these
>> kinds of tools.
>
>
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 04:34:07 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 04:34:07 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:29:14 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Justin King has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove UBSAN_ENABLED From spec.gmk.in
>
> src/java.base/share/native/launcher/main.c line 37:
>
>> 35: #include "jni.h"
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:02:12 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> make/autoconf/spec.gmk.in line 459:
>>
>>> 457:
>>> 458: # UndefinedBehaviorSanitizer
>>> 459: UBSAN_ENABLED:=@UBSAN_ENABLED@
>>
>> I don't see anything reading this. ??
>
> To be clear there was a reason that `ASAN_ENABLED` was original
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 05:48:41 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying use of these tools may
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 03:26:15 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>
>> I'm not saying use of these tools may not b
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior or suppress errors which are intentional. The goal is t
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:27:43 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
>> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
>> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
>> beha
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 03:26:15 GMT, Justin King wrote:
>> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is
>> actively seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are
>> other tools, should we support them all?
>>
>> I'm not saying use of these tools may not b
On Mon, 12 Dec 2022 01:31:38 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I think it requires much broader discussion as to whether OpenJDK is actively
> seen to endorse these tools. Why these tools? What if there are other tools,
> should we support them all?
>
> I'm not saying use of these tools may not be us
On Fri, 9 Dec 2022 06:53:31 GMT, Justin King wrote:
> Allow building OpenJDK with UBSan. Currently the build fails when optimizing
> the image due to lots of undefined behavior (it invokes the built JVM).
> Follow up PRs will either replace the undefined behavior with well defined
> behavior o
On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 14:35:00 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> This patch adds NMT tracking to the zlib.
>
> *Please note: we currently discuss whether NMT can be expanded across the JDK
> in this ML discussion [1]. This PR depends on the outcome of that discussion
> and won't proceed unless greenlig
19 matches
Mail list logo
