s/jlink tests (including the new one).
>
> Thoughts?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains four additional
commits sinc
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 18:14:39 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this fairly simple change to improve how the
> `JimageDiffGenerator` works. The original implementation is pretty naive and
> read all bytes into memory and then compared them. This improved version only
> re
During code review of
[JDK-8346239](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346239) a few comments were
made after the PR integrated. This follow-up patch cleans this up and adds a
unit test for the `JimageDiffGenerator` class.
Testing:
- [ ] GHA
- [x] tools/jlink tests (including the new one).
T
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:44:05 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review feedback
>
> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/runtim
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:49:23 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review feedback
>
> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/runtimelink/Ji
s/jlink tests (including the new one).
>
> Thoughts?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Review feedback
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23014/files
- new: https://git.op
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 03:38:48 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Copyright and @comment
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but in neither of these tests is it
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 15:08:31 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Clean backport of a test follow-up for #22849 targeting JDK 24. Please
> review! Thanks in advance.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: c033806b
Author:Severin Gehwolf
URL:
https://git.openjdk.o
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 18:14:39 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this fairly simple change to improve how the
> `JimageDiffGenerator` works. The original implementation is pretty naive and
> read all bytes into memory and then compared them. This improved version only
> re
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:25:43 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Clean backport of [JDK-8345259](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259)
> to JDK 24 which has JEP 493.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 7d4fa781
Author:Severin Gehwolf
URL:
https://git.openj
JDK that includes `jmods` folder.
>
> Thoughts?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Expand comment
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22969/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.org/
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 14:56:55 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this trivial test-only patch in support of running tests on
>> JEP 493 enabled builds. Both tests use the `ToolProvider` API so as to run
>> `jlink` in-process of the test JVM which includes mod
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:32:39 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> During code review of
> [JDK-8346239](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346239) a few comments
> were made after the PR integrated. This follow-up patch cleans this up and
> adds a unit test for the `JimageDiffGene
On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:58:36 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> During code review of
>> [JDK-8346239](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346239) a few comments
>> were made after the PR integrated. This follow-up patch cleans this up and
>> adds a unit test for the `Ji
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 08:27:20 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
>> Alternative approach to #24012
>>
>> This keeps the current handling of *.pdb vs *.stripped.pdb which allows
>> debugging at the cost of a little hack in jlink. Maybe the code in jlink can
>> be improved, e.g. make it more conditiona
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 09:52:02 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> See the bug for rationale.
>
> This goal for this improvement is to be easily backportable, so we can catch
> up with update releases. As such, it does a few borderline-trivial changes,
> and _does not_ change the jspawnhelper protoc
On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 10:51:08 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> See the bug for rationale.
>>
>> This goal for this improvement is to be easily backportable, so we can catch
>> up with update releases. As such, it does a few borderline-trivial changes,
>> and _doe
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 06:31:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> What about changes to conf files, especially Java.security (for hardening TLS
> settings) - or at least pointing to a include?
You can still do that after creating the custom runtime as you do today when
linking using JMODs. The point of t
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 10:12:43 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > The cacerts issue mentioned in the JBS issue relates to an RPM installation
> > of the JDK where the cacerts file is a symlink to the distro provided one.
> > So I think that's "use system" issue.
> > TZ updates would potentially break t
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 17:43:50 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> Would it maybe make sense/be possible to offer some re-hash functionality for
> using in 2nd step builds?
What would that be? Right now linking from the run-time image doesn't allow for
`jdk.jlink` to be included, which prevents a 2nd
- [x] GHA
> - [x] Some manual tests together with
> [JDK-8352692](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8352692) on some JEP 493
> enabled builds.
> - [x] `jlink` jtreg tests.
>
> Thoughts?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits sinc
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 17:43:07 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option
>> `--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for
>> files in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this i
- [x] GHA
> - [x] Some manual tests together with
> [JDK-8352692](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8352692) on some JEP 493
> enabled builds.
> - [x] `jlink` jtreg tests.
>
> Thoughts?
Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit sinc
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 08:28:23 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Copyright updates
>> - Allow for ${java.home} substitution when \@file is
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 08:53:21 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > @AlanBateman Would we need a CSR for this? This isn't any option that shows
> > up anywhere user-visible, so I'm thinking not. Please let me know. Thanks!
>
> There isn't any change to a supported interface so probably not.
Thanks.
> T
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 17:30:53 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review v2
>
> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/LinkableRuntimeI
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 14:59:37 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for cgroups-based metrics reporting in the
>> `jdk.internal.platform` package. This fix is supposed to address wrong
>> reporting of certain limits if the limits aren't set at the leaf no
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 11:42:31 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Sure. It's not really a properties file (which assumes `key=value`). How
>> about `upgrade_files_.conf`? Then the pattern could be
>> `upgrade_files_*.conf`. Thoughts?
>
> Yeah, my comment was meant more like "maybe you should turn i
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 04:49:03 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contai
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:03:36 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> It's very odd, but when I attempt this then the resource is not found. It
>> seems to fail on the module name verification. For example: `jlink --help |
>> tail -n2` shows as `disabled` for an enabled linkable runtime image.
>
> Without r
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 07:55:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> Part of me is concerned that the hidden option is a bit of an attractive
>>> nuisance. What would you think about just having a fixed list in a
>>> properties file in the repo, thus a resource in the jlink module. This
>>> would avoid th
raded with a link from the
> current run-time image.
> 2. For those files the hash sum checks are skipped.
>
> **Testing**
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] `jdk/tools/jlink` jtreg tests (also on
> [GHA](https://github.com/jerboaa/jdk/actions/runs/14308729271))
> - [x] Some ma
333446). This
> patch adds a test using that framework among some simpler unit tests.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Testing:
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] Container tests on Linux x86_64 on cg v1 and cg v2 systems
> - [x] Some manual testing using systemd slices
Severin Gehwolf has updated the
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 14:50:11 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> > The cacerts issue mentioned in the JBS issue relates to an RPM
>>> > installation of the JDK where the cacerts file is a symlink to the distro
>>> > provided one. So I think that's "use system" issue.
>>> > TZ updates would potentially
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 12:29:22 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> Alternative approach to #24012
>
> This keeps the current handling of *.pdb vs *.stripped.pdb which allows
> debugging at the cost of a little hack in jlink. Maybe the code in jlink can
> be improved, e.g. make it more conditional.
>
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025 13:55:26 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/JRTArchive.java line
>> 226:
>>
>>> 224: if (Files.exists(strippedPath)) {
>>> 225: path = strippedPath;
>>> 226:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2025 08:27:20 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> Can we maybe add a possibility to store two alternative SHA sums in the JMod
> archives, per file? Then we could add SHA sums for both, the stripped and the
> full pdb file and either one which is present in the current runtime would b
raded with a link from the
> current run-time image.
> 2. For those files the hash sum checks are skipped.
>
> **Testing**
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] `jdk/tools/jlink` jtreg tests
> - [x] Some manual tests with updated `tzdb.dat` and `cacerts` files.
>
> Thoughts?
Seve
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:14:28 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review comments from Christoph
>
> test/jdk/tools/jlink/runtimeImage/Upgradeab
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 04:49:03 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> I see that you're actively on the upgradeable files. What about #24190?
Let's keep the discussion on #24190, please.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24388#issuecomment-2782507174
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 16:12:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > @AlanBateman Any more thoughts on this? We'd need to include a patch like
> > this one for getting the Fedora JDK 24+ builds to work with JEP 493
> > enabled. Thanks!
>
> Allowing for a small number of upgradable files is needed, I see y
raded with a link from the
> current run-time image.
> 2. For those files the hash sum checks are skipped.
>
> **Testing**
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] `jdk/tools/jlink` jtreg tests (also on
> [GHA](https://github.com/jerboaa/jdk/actions/runs/14308729271))
> - [x] Some ma
On Wed, 9 Apr 2025 10:36:03 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review v2
>
> make/modules/jdk.jl
On Sat, 5 Apr 2025 04:45:00 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contai
On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 11:02:15 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option
> `--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for files
> in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this is needed. This
On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 12:21:06 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/jlink/runtimeImage/UpgradeableFileCacertsTest.java line 42:
>>
>>> 40: /*
>>> 41: * @test
>>> 42: * @summary Verify that no errors are reported for files the have been
>>
On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 13:09:31 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this trivial test-only fix. A new test introduced with
> [JDK-8353267](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353267) runs `jlink` using
> the `ToolProvider` API in-process. This is problematic for JEP 493 enabled
Please review this fix to
[JDK-8353185](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353185). The reading logic
for the config file would erroneously use `scanner.nextLine()` when the current
line to be added is in `line`. `line` is not being added, but
`scanner.nextLine()` unintentionally skipping lin
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:31:50 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this fix to
> [JDK-8353185](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353185). The reading logic
> for the config file would erroneously use `scanner.nextLine()` when the
> current line to be added is in `line`. `
On Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:31:50 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this fix to
> [JDK-8353185](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353185). The reading logic
> for the config file would erroneously use `scanner.nextLine()` when the
> current line to be added is in `line`. `
Please review this trivial test-only fix. A new test introduced with
[JDK-8353267](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8353267) runs `jlink` using
the `ToolProvider` API in-process. This is problematic for JEP 493 enabled
builds which don't allow to be run on a patched JDK. Note that JTREG patch
On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 18:39:57 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> For JEP 493-enabled builds there are no JMODs. Certain files come from the
> installed JDK image when a user creates a custom run-time from it. This is
> problematic for example for files that often come from a different packag
On Tue, 1 Apr 2025 14:59:37 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for cgroups-based metrics reporting in the
>> `jdk.internal.platform` package. This fix is supposed to address wrong
>> reporting of certain limits if the limits aren't set at the leaf no
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 01:11:33 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> Cgroup V1 subsustem fails to initialize mounted controllers properly in
>> certain cases, that may lead to controllers left undetected/inactive. We
>> observed the behavior in CloudFoundry deployments, it affects also host
>> syste
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 20:40:37 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> Cgroup V1 subsustem fails to initialize mounted controllers properly in
>> certain cases, that may lead to controllers left undetected/inactive. We
>> observed the behavior in CloudFoundry deployments, it affects also host
>> syste
On Sun, 2 Mar 2025 21:17:04 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
> > OK for me now. `test_cgroupSubsystem_linux.cpp` needs a copyright update as
> > well.
>
> Thanks for your review @jerboaa ! I cheched the
> test_cgroupSubsystem_linux.cpp, it's already updated to 2025 in the master
> branch.
OK!
On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 12:19:53 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> Sergey Chernyshev has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> updated comment
>
> src/hotspot/os/linux/cgroupV2Subsystem_linux.cpp line 2:
>
>> 1: /*
>> 2: * Copyright (c
On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 00:52:41 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> Cgroup V1 subsustem fails to initialize mounted controllers properly in
>> certain cases, that may lead to controllers left undetected/inactive. We
>> observed the behavior in CloudFoundry deployments, it affects also host
>> syste
On Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:22:20 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for cgroups-based metrics reporting in the
>> `jdk.internal.platform` package. This fix is supposed to address wrong
>> reporting of certain limits if the limits aren't set at the leaf no
333446). This
> patch adds a test using that framework among some simpler unit tests.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Testing:
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] Container tests on Linux x86_64 on cg v1 and cg v2 systems
> - [x] Some manual testing using systemd slices
Severin Gehwolf has updated the
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 16:31:05 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> src/hotspot/os/linux/cgroupV1Subsystem_linux.cpp line 42:
>>
>>> 40: * When runs in a container, the method handles the case
>>> 41: * when a process is moved between cgroups.
>>> 42: */
>>
>> This needs to explain exactly what i
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 23:33:01 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> `CgroupV1Controller::set_subsystem_path` needs high level comment update to
>> describe the logic happening.
>>
>> Testing:
And after the patch this would become this, right?
```
/sys/fs/cgroup/cpu,cpuacct/system.slice/g
On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 21:20:49 GMT, Sergey Chernyshev
wrote:
>> Cgroup V1 subsustem fails to initialize mounted controllers properly in
>> certain cases, that may lead to controllers left undetected/inactive. We
>> observed the behavior in CloudFoundry deployments, it affects also host
>> syste
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 17:09:06 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option
>> `--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for
>> files in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this i
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 07:55:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > I'm not entirely sure what you are suggesting. Is it keeping a list of
> > "upgradeable" files in a properties file. Files listed in that properties
> > file aren't checked for hash sums (i.e. even if it's not modified)? That
> > is, the
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 15:22:10 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> For JEP 493-enabled builds there are no JMODs. Certain files come from the
>> installed JDK image when a user creates a custom run-time from it. This is
>> problematic for example for files that often come from a
erts
> cf2b4c17161e79001c8e07def3de36c0d523f00a2a6b6e33893a2a3669d930957c11ac765dd29d5ff80e63ad100ef0258291891377f7133b997111ba97b15146
> ./lib/security/cacerts
>
>
> **Testing**
>
> - [x] GHA
> - [x] `jdk/tools/jlink` jtreg tests
> - [x] Some manual tests with updat
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 07:55:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> Part of me is concerned that the hidden option is a bit of an attractive
>>> nuisance. What would you think about just having a fixed list in a
>>> properties file in the repo, thus a resource in the jlink module. This
>>> would avoid th
Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option
`--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for files
in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this is needed. This
patch allows for the `--sha-overrides` option to be either specified multip
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 13:51:10 GMT, Christoph Langer wrote:
> The only review thing I could find were the copyright years which need
> updates.
I've fixed copyright years in the latest update.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24190#issuecomment-2752051896
On Tue, 25 Mar 2025 17:43:07 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this enhancement which adds a hidden `jlink` option
>> `--sha-overrides` that can be used to provide alternative hash sums for
>> files in an image. Please see the bug for use-cases as to why this i
On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:42:11 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/jlink/runtimeImage/ModifiedFilesWithShaOverrideTest.java line
>> 32:
>>
>>> 30: * @requires (vm.compMode != "Xcomp" & os.maxMemory >= 2g & os.family
>>> =
On Thu, 3 Apr 2025 09:46:38 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> Part of me is concerned that the hidden option is a bit of an attractive
> nuisance. What would you think about just having a fixed list in a properties
> file in the repo, thus a resource in the jlink module. This would avoid the
> list i
For JEP 493-enabled builds there are no JMODs. Certain files come from the
installed JDK image when a user creates a custom run-time from it. This is
problematic for example for files that often come from a different package
(e.g. `cacerts` file for Linux distro builds of OpenJDK packaged as RPM
On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 01:26:38 GMT, SendaoYan wrote:
> Should we should copy the dependent files such as libasan.so.8 to docker
> images when build it.
See:
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333144?focusedId=14792939&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comme
On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 21:27:16 GMT, David Beaumont wrote:
> Oddly while the status at the bottom of the conversation says it has "2
> approvals", the tickbox:
>
> ```
> Change must be properly reviewed (2 reviews required, with at least 1
> Reviewer, 1 Author
> ```
>
> is not checked. I can try
On Wed, 25 Jun 2025 14:09:42 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> When the address sanitizer ASAN is configured, we run into errors in the
> docker tests.
> Example hotspot/jtreg/containers/docker/DockerBasicTest.java :
>
> [STDOUT]
> /jdk/bin/java: error while loading shared libraries: libasan.so.8:
601 - 677 of 677 matches
Mail list logo
