-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 86
7904115: Fix for AIX test case failures due to incorrect alignment for double and pointer #296
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
varada1110
wants to merge
11
commits into
openjdk:master
Choose a base branch
from
varada1110:testfix
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
97b3e87
testcase fixes for aix
varada1110 fdaf568
testcase fixes for aix
varada1110 996537e
testcase fixes for aix
varada1110 d4a0f64
testcase fixes for aix
varada1110 12b42e8
addition of -m64 at right place
varada1110 7f1983b
addition of -m64 at right place
varada1110 f43b66f
reverted the C_DOUBLE alignment fix
varada1110 56d5b88
added field alignment and natural alignment argument
varada1110 32846ad
restoring the changes
varada1110 a798d54
7904115: Fix for AIX test case failures due to incorrect alignment fo…
varada1110 a3dbfaf
7904115: Fix for AIX test case failures due to incorrect alignment fo…
varada1110 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
With natural alignment,
doubleis aligned to8bytes, so this change shouldn't be needed?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I’m seeing two test failures reporting unsupported layout 4%D(8) and expected [D8(d)] but found [4%D8(d)]. In these cases, it is reported as 4 byte alignment for double. The 4 byte handling resolves these failures
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem is that the first number here is the actual alignment of the
C_DOUBLElayout. We get this from the canonical layout map of the system's native linker. On AIX this is just the layout of JAVA_DOUBLE [1], [2], which has an alignment of 8 bytes [3]. So, the first number here should really be 8, even on AIX.If changing this is making the tests pass, it indicates that there's an issue elsewhere. Is it possible these tests are missing
#pragma align(natural)?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have tried adding
#pragma align(natural)to the failing test structs, but still reported 4 byte alignment for subsequent double. Another alternative that fixed the tests is when added attribute((aligned(8))) for the double field.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Which tests in particular are failing? Did you look at the Java code generated by jextract?