On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:57:13 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Improving option value handling to support passing argument value starts
>> with "--".
>>
>> Before the fix, in following example, --add-modules will be considered as
>> another option for JLink instead of argument value for --add-options.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2025 18:19:59 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Improving option value handling to support passing argument value starts
>> with "--".
>>
>> Before the fix, in following example, --add-modules will be considered as
>> another option for JLink instead of argument value for --add-options.
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:59:56 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
> Improving option value handling to support passing argument value starts with
> "--".
>
> Before the fix, in following example, --add-modules will be considered as
> another option for JLink instead of argument value for --add-options.
> --ad
On Mon, 29 Jul 2024 07:36:15 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> So how should we proceed this? This problem is critical for some modularized
>> applications as I said before.
>>
>> I agree that we need to consider the approach for this, but it is worth to
>> provide the fix even if it is short-term,
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 12:20:17 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> We cannot pass GNU style options like `--enable-preview` to `jlink
> --add-option`. It is hard to use for complex application.
>
> We have workaround for this issue (see JBS), but I think it is better to fix
> on JD
On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 14:38:39 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Hello @YaSuenag, I haven't had a chance to build your change locally and try
> it myself, but I suspect this change isn't enough to address the issue. Does
> this change allow for:
>
> ```
> jlink ... --add-options --add-exports java.base
We cannot pass GNU style options like `--enable-preview` to `jlink
--add-option`. It is hard to use for complex application.
We have workaround for this issue (see JBS), but I think it is better to fix on
JDK side.
-
Commit messages:
- 8303884: jlink --add-options plugin does not
On Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:28:29 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote:
>> @YaSuenag `r12` is restored in `reinit_heapbase()` if needed and no, `r12`
>> does not need remembering because it is a constant and can be restored from
>> somewhere else.
>
> I think your code is fine. Restoring `r12_heapbase` at this p
On Wed, 25 Oct 2023 13:18:33 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> Jorn Vernee has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - a -> an
>> - add note to downcallHandle about passing heap segments by-reference
>
> src/hotspot/cpu/x86/downcallLinke
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 12:22:00 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the
> function has two arguments, it would be following:
>
>
> Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x0
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 12:22:00 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the
> function has two arguments, it would be following:
>
>
> Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x0
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 12:22:00 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the
> function has two arguments, it would be following:
>
>
> Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x0
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 12:22:00 GMT, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
> In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the
> function has two arguments, it would be following:
>
>
> Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x0
On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 02:12:43 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the
>> function has two arguments, it would be following:
>>
>>
>> Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x7fcae394cd10
>> ---
In FFM, native function would be called via `nep_invoker_blob`. If the function
has two arguments, it would be following:
Decoding RuntimeStub - nep_invoker_blob 0x7fcae394cd10
0x7fcae394cd80: pushq %rbp
15 matches
Mail list logo
