RFR (L): 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM [Was: Re: RFR: Fix shark for latest Hotspot and LLVM] (original) (raw)

Roman Kennke rkennke at redhat.com
Thu Nov 29 06:26:19 PST 2012

Previous message: RFR (L): 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM [Was: Re: RFR: Fix shark for latest Hotspot and LLVM]
Next message: RFR (L): 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM [Was: Re: RFR: Fix shark for latest Hotspot and LLVM]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Am Dienstag, den 27.11.2012, 10:59 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger:

On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote:

> Am Montag, den 26.11.2012, 17:14 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger: >> On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:44 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> Am Montag, den 26.11.2012, 15:43 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger: >>>> On Nov 26, 2012, at 3:18 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am Montag, den 26.11.2012, 11:55 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger: >>>>>> On Nov 23, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, den 21.11.2012, 14:52 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger: >>>>>>>> On Nov 21, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Christian Thalinger <christian.thalinger at oracle.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 21, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Christian Thalinger <christian.thalinger at oracle.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Nov 21, 2012, at 12:54 PM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Am Mittwoch, den 21.11.2012, 12:47 -0800 schrieb Christian Thalinger: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 21, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Christian Thalinger <christian.thalinger at oracle.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 21, 2012, at 9:31 AM, Roman Kennke <rkennke at redhat.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi there, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> during the last days I worked on fixing the Shark compiler for Hotspot >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get it to build and run again, with the latest Hotspot code and LLVM. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here are some details: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - A lot of changes are just to make it build and the compiler happy. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>> example, I had to remove a lot of 'const' qualifiers because of API >>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes in LLVM. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Most other changes have to do with the split of the oop and metadata >>>>>>>>>>>>>> class hierarchies in Hotspot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Then there have been a few changes caused by LLVM changes and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> improvements, most notably the LLVM intrinsics for atomic operations >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (memory barrier and cmpxchg) have been removed and now have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> representation directly in LLVM's IR. This makes our code a little >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nicer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I tested this by running a number of applications, most notably Eclipse >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which is notoriously difficult on VMs), Java2Demo, SwingSet2 and a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of other stuff. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to get this integrated into OpenJDK now if possible. You >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can find the full webrev here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev.00/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The changes seem to touch almost only shark files so these should be fine. One question though: >>>>>>>>>>>>> _>>>>>>>>>>>>> + develop(bool, SharkShowCompiledMethods, false, _ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't PrintCompilation doing that already? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The shared code changes look good. I filed: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- Chris >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are also a very minor change required in JDK: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev-jdk-00/ >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In order to build it, apply the patches on hsx/hotspot-comp 's hotspot >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and jdk repositories respectivly. Find my build script here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/Build8-zero-shark >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Review and adjust variables to your settings, most notably you will >>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to change LLVMCONFIG to point to your LLVM 3.1 installation.) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please let me know if there are any issues or how we can get this >>>>>>>>>>>>>> integrated into Hotspot. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Finally I installed LLVM on one of our machines to be able to do a Shark build once in a while. When I try to do a jvmgshark build I get: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In file included from /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/PointerLikeTypeTraits.h:18, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /usr/local/include/llvm/ADT/PointerIntPair.h:17, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /usr/local/include/llvm/Use.h:28, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /usr/local/include/llvm/Value.h:17, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /usr/local/include/llvm/Argument.h:17, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/shark/llvmHeaders.hpp:39, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/shark/sharkEntry.hpp:29, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/compiler/disassembler.cpp:51: _>>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/DataTypes.h:53:3: error: #error "Must #define STDCCONSTANTMACROS before " "#including Support/DataTypes.h" >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In file included from /usr/local/include/llvm/Attributes.h:18, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /usr/local/include/llvm/Argument.h:18, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/shark/llvmHeaders.hpp:39, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/shark/sharkEntry.hpp:29, >>>>>>>>>>>> from /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/compiler/disassembler.cpp:51: >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h: In function ‘bool llvm::isInt(int64t)’: >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h:38: error: there are no arguments to ‘INT64C’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘INT64C’ must be available >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h:38: note: (if you use ‘-fpermissive’, G++ will accept your code, but allowing the use of an undeclared name is deprecated) >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h:38: error: there are no arguments to ‘INT64C’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘INT64C’ must be available >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h: In function ‘bool llvm::isUInt(uint64t)’: >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h:64: error: there are no arguments to ‘UINT64C’ that depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of ‘UINT64C’ must be available >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h: In function ‘bool llvm::isIntN(unsigned int, int64t)’: >>>>>>>>>>>> /usr/local/include/llvm/Support/MathExtras.h:96: error: ‘INT64C’ was not declared in this scope >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Not sure if the latter is because of the former one. Have you seen this before? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, it's caused by the former. And yes, I have seen it before. IIRC, >>>>>>>>>>> this happens when certain cflags are not set correctly. The script >>>>>>>>>>> jdk/make/jdkgenericprofile.sh will call llvm-config to figure out the >>>>>>>>>>> correct flags. In order for this to work, you need to have the full path >>>>>>>>>>> to the llvm-config script set in the LLVMCONFIG env variable. Were you >>>>>>>>>>> using the build script that I provided? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No. I took your script and got the important environment variables. But I missed the LLVM* ones. Usually we only build hotspot so we don't have this jdk script. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Now that I have the LLVM* variables it's even worse: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> /home/cthaling/8003868/src/share/vm/oops/oop.hpp:72: error: cast from type ‘markOopDesc* const volatile*’ to type ‘markOopDesc**’ casts away constness >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It's probably this guy: -Wcast-qual >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Got it: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> $ java -version >>>>>>>>> java version "1.8.0-ea" >>>>>>>>> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0-ea-b65) >>>>>>>>> OpenJDK 64-Bit Shark VM (build 25.0-b11-internal-jvmg, mixed mode) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I ran the compiler regression tests and Shark crashes in 5091921: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> cthaling at intelsdv03.us.oracle.com:~/8003868/test$ jtreg -workDir:$EXPORTHOME/jtreg -reportDir:$EXPORTHOME/jtreg -testjdk:$JAVAHOME -verbose:summary compiler/5091921/ >>>>>>>> Directory "/export/twisti/jtreg/scratch" not found: creating >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test5091921.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6186134.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6196102.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6357214.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6559156.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6753639.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6850611.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6890943.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6897150.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6905845.java >>>>>>>> Passed: compiler/5091921/Test6931567.java >>>>>>>> /net/sqenfs-1.us.oracle.com/export1/comp/vm/tool/jtreg/execution/linux/bin/jtreg: line 139: 27784 Segmentation fault (core dumped) "${JTJAVA}" javaOpts−Dprogram=‘basename"javaOpts -Dprogram=basename "</annotation></semantics></math>javaOpts−Dprogram=‘basename"0" -jar "${JTHOME}/lib/jtreg.jar" $jtregOpts >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You can also run all them with a simple make in test/ by setting: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> PRODUCTHOME=$JAVAHOME >>>>>>>> TESTDIRS=compiler >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Alright, I found another fairly grave bug that I would like to include a >>>>>>> fix for: apparently, a 'fence' is not enough of a memory barrier for >>>>>>> volatile putfield/getfield (duh). Which basically broke all of j.u.c. >>>>>>> LLVM offers atomic loads and stores, which seem to be exactly what is >>>>>>> needed for volatile field access. However, it does not provide helper >>>>>>> functions for those in llvm::IRBuilder so I wrote my own. This should be >>>>>>> the final patch for now (unless you find something else). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev.03/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Hmm. Maybe I did something wrong but I've already rebuilt twice: >>>>>> >>>>>> $ java -Xcomp -version >>>>>> Value type size is target-dependent. Ask TLI. >>>>>> UNREACHABLE executed at /usr/local/src/llvm-3.1.src/include/llvm/CodeGen/ValueTypes.h:257! >>>>>> Stack dump: >>>>>> 0. Running pass 'X86 DAG->DAG Instruction Selection' on function '@"java.lang.System::getProperty"' >>>>>> Aborted (core dumped) >>>>> >>>>> Arg! The last couple of changes I did only with LLVM3.2, where the >>>>> problem disappears. Apparently, LLVM3.1 (and pre) don't deal well with >>>>> atomic load/store :-( I re-introduced the CreateMemoryBarrier call and >>>>> use that for SHARKLLVMVERSION <= 31._ _>>>>> >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev.04/ >>>>> >>>>> Hope that works better :-) >>>> >>>> I'm so sorry but... >>>> >>>> /export/twisti/build/8003868/build/linuxamd64shark/product/libjvm.so: undefined reference to `SharkBuilder::memorybarrier()' >>> >>> Gaaa, what the... I thought I did clean rebuilds with both llvm3.2 and >>> llvm3.1, but apparently not (maybe I shouldn't work after 1am). This >>> (hopefully final final) patch re-instates the missing memorybarrier() >>> method: >>> >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev.05/ >>> >>> Sorry for the messy back-and-forth. >> >> Again, so sorry: >> >> $ java -Xcomp -version >> LLVM ERROR: Program used external function 'llvm.memory.barrier' which could not be resolved! >> >> Send a new patch tomorrow after some sleep ;-) > > Yeah, apparently 'replaced by' means that the old thing (the intrinsics) > are indeed gone ;-) > > The problem is that the correct way to implement it (atomic load/store) > doesn't work, the 'old way' (the memorybarrier() intrinsic call) > doesn't work either, I also tried CreateAtomicRMW() which is probably > not 100% correct, but would have done the job, but that doesn't work > either (it throws the same error as the atomic load/store ...). The > problem seems to only appear on 64bit volatile access. > > I don't know a really good solution that doesn't require jumping through > big hoops, and I don't feel like working around LLVM bugs like this, > especially since LLVM 3.2 (which should be released real soon now) works > just fine. If you have a suggestion, please let me know, otherwise I > suggest the following patch, which gets rid of all the LLVM31 blocks > again and creates atomic load/store instructions (and requires LLVM 3.2 > which can be found here > http://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/branches/release32/ ). > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev.06/ That's a reasonable thing to do given the tentative release date of December 16th. While running the compiler regression tests I got a couple of failures. You might want to address them with separate bugs.

Hi Twisti,

I see that you committed the patch, thanks a lot for this! However, there is still the small jdk patch missing:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rkennke/shark/webrev-jdk-00/

Can I push this myself or do you want to do it?

Cheers, Roman

Previous message: RFR (L): 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM [Was: Re: RFR: Fix shark for latest Hotspot and LLVM]
Next message: RFR (L): 8003868: fix shark for latest HotSpot and LLVM [Was: Re: RFR: Fix shark for latest Hotspot and LLVM]
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list