jdk
jdk copied to clipboard
8330988: Implementation of 8288293: Windows/gcc Port for hsdis
WIP
This changeset contains hsdis for Windows/gcc Port. It supports both the binutils and capstone backends, though the LLVM backend is left out due to compatibility issues encountered during the build. Currently, which gcc distributions are supported is still to be clarified, as several, ranging from Cygwin, to MinGW64, to the gcc subsystems from MSYS2. For this reason, the build system hack in place at the moment to compile the binutils backend on Windows is still left in place, for now.
Progress
- [ ] Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
- [x] Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
- [x] Commit message must refer to an issue
Issue
- JDK-8330988: Implementation of 8288293: Windows/gcc Port for hsdis (Enhancement - P4)
Reviewing
Using git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18915/head:pull/18915
$ git checkout pull/18915
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/18915
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18915/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 18915
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 18915
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18915.diff
Webrev
:wave: Welcome back jwaters! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.
❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated. See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.
@TheShermanTanker The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:
buildclientcore-libside-supportserviceability
When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.
Webrevs
There's a huge amount of changes for just hsdis... You might have to separate out the infrastructure changes that seem to amount to most of the changes here.
This is going to take me a while to get through.
There's a huge amount of changes for just hsdis... You might have to separate out the infrastructure changes that seem to amount to most of the changes here.
This is going to take me a while to get through.
Sorry, it's still a WIP, and I believe something broke and scattered changes from one of my other local branches into this current changeset
Please mark the PR as draft it is not intended for review.
@magicus I think I might need some help here. Currently all the Cygwin stuff is gated behind ifeq ($(TOOLCHAIN_TYPE), microsoft) checks... should they be behind isBuildOsEnv cygwin checks instead? I don't know how to add support for Cygwin gcc for most of hsdis, since it is quite different from the more modern gcc distributions that are found in places like MSYS2 and MINGW64. But most of the existing logic seems to accomodate more for the Microsoft compiler than it is concerned about the OS environment being used, and for this reason I can't tell which of the 2 checks to use for the existing hack that switches from microsoft to gcc. Also, gcc doesn't require FIXPATH, but Microsoft does, but I don't want to check for microsoft inside TOOLCHAIN_FIND_COMPILER, what should I do instead to ensure gcc doesn't get FIXPATH while Microsoft does?
Also @magicus, what is the typical path passed to --with-binutils like on Windows? Something like --with-binutils=/c/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42 doesn't work correctly, since the include path to dis-asm.h would then become
#include "/c/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42/include/dis-asm.h"
Which causes a configure check to fail on the compile stage since gcc cannot recognise the MINGW-esque /c/ as a drive, and then causes configure to erroneously report binutils as using the Old API when it's in fact using the New API. --with-binutils=C:/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42 on the other hand works as expected. Should there be a fixup for the path there so gcc can recognise it properly?
@magicus?
Hmm, it seems Magnus isn't available at the moment. @erikj79 might you be able to answer my questions regarding hsdis?
Magnus? Erik? You guys there? :(
Hi Julian, sorry for not getting back to you.
The problem from my PoV is that this is a very large and intrusive patch in the build of the actual product, for a claimed problem in the tangential hsdis library. I have not understood a pressing business need to get a Windows/gcc port for hsdis, which means I can't really prioritize trying to understand this patch.
As you know, the build system does not currently really separate between "the OS is Windows" and "the toolchain is Microsoft". I understand that you want to fix that, and in theory I support it. However, you must also realize that making a complete fix of this requires a lot of work, for something that there is no clearly defined need. (After all, cl.exe works fine to create the build, has no apparent issues, and is as far as an "official" compiler for Windows as you can get.) That makes it fall squarely in the WIBNIs bucked ("wouldn't it be nice if...").
If you can fix just the hsdis build without changing anything outside the hsdis Makefiles, that would be a different story. Such a change would be limited in scope, easy to say it will not affect the product proper, and be easier to review.
Hi Julian, sorry for not getting back to you.
The problem from my PoV is that this is a very large and intrusive patch in the build of the actual product, for a claimed problem in the tangential hsdis library. I have not understood a pressing business need to get a Windows/gcc port for hsdis, which means I can't really prioritize trying to understand this patch.
As you know, the build system does not currently really separate between "the OS is Windows" and "the toolchain is Microsoft". I understand that you want to fix that, and in theory I support it. However, you must also realize that making a complete fix of this requires a lot of work, for something that there is no clearly defined need. (After all, cl.exe works fine to create the build, has no apparent issues, and is as far as an "official" compiler for Windows as you can get.) That makes it fall squarely in the WIBNIs bucked ("wouldn't it be nice if...").
If you can fix just the hsdis build without changing anything outside the hsdis Makefiles, that would be a different story. Such a change would be limited in scope, easy to say it will not affect the product proper, and be easier to review.
Oh, no worries. Sorry for sounding a little impatient.
The problem is that there are areas in the build system that will need changing to support hsdis compilation, not just the hsdis Makefile and autoconf file itself. I can try to work on minimizing the amount of changes to non-hsdis files (I was hoping the current changes were small enough, but it seems they are not), but I believe it's impossible to achieve this by only touching the hsdis Makefile and lib-hsdis.m4. That is, there will necessarily be changes, no matter how minimal, to non-hsdis files.
As for why do this at all, I was mainly driven by seeing the hack in place for the binutils backend on Windows. It only supports Cygwin, of which the gcc installation is subpar compared to the newer gcc provided by some MSYS2 subsystems (MINGW64 gcc is primarily battle tested on MSYS2, on Cygwin it doesn't get as much attention and misses out further fixes and enhancements from the MSYS2 team, for instance it even links to the obsolete msvcrt library), and the hack itself has several flaws that don't seem apparent at first (For instance, -lpthread will link to libwinpthread.dll and result in an invisible dependency on that dll depending on the Windows platform, which will cause loading hsdis to silently fail depending on how it's loaded for seemingly random reasons!). I wanted to replace that (or I guess provide a better alternative) by adding semi proper support to the hsdis build for the more modern and better battle tested gcc that some MSYS2 subsystems provide, to streamline compiling the binutils hsdis on Windows. So this is mainly about hsdis-binutils on Windows. hsdis-capstone I also decided to support because it's small and relatively easy to pile on top of the existing work, and MSYS2 also provides Capstone as well. The same unfortunately could not be said for hsdis-llvm, which was significantly more complex than Capstone is
I'm not sure where to go from here. I could support gcc for hsdis binutils by extending the hack that exists for Cygwin, but I really don't want to do that. I could enhance the build system to semi properly support gcc for hsdis only, as I've done, but the changes will necessarily touch non hsdis files as well, no matter how minimal they are. I'll return this to draft for the time being I suppose, I'd be interested in hearing which way forward you prefer though
But while I work on making this change even smaller and easier to review, could I ask the above questions again? (Well, except for the FIXPATH one, you can ignore that)
@magicus I think I might need some help here. Currently all the Cygwin stuff is gated behind ifeq ($(TOOLCHAIN_TYPE), microsoft) checks... should they be behind isBuildOsEnv cygwin checks instead? I don't know how to add support for Cygwin gcc for most of hsdis, since it is quite different from the more modern gcc distributions that are found in places like MSYS2 and MINGW64. But most of the existing logic seems to accomodate more for the Microsoft compiler than it is concerned about the OS environment being used, and for this reason I can't tell which of the 2 checks to use for the existing hack that switches from microsoft to gcc. Also, gcc doesn't require FIXPATH, but Microsoft does, but I don't want to check for microsoft inside TOOLCHAIN_FIND_COMPILER, what should I do instead to ensure gcc doesn't get FIXPATH while Microsoft does?
Also @magicus, what is the typical path passed to --with-binutils like on Windows? Something like --with-binutils=/c/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42 doesn't work correctly, since the include path to dis-asm.h would then become
#include "/c/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42/include/dis-asm.h"Which causes a configure check to fail on the compile stage since gcc cannot recognise the MINGW-esque /c/ as a drive, and then causes configure to erroneously report binutils as using the Old API when it's in fact using the New API. --with-binutils=C:/Users/vertig0/Downloads/binutils-2.42 on the other hand works as expected. Should there be a fixup for the path there so gcc can recognise it properly?
@TheShermanTanker Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. Note for future reference, the bots always squash all changes into a single commit automatically as part of the integration. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.
@TheShermanTanker Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. Note for future reference, the bots always squash all changes into a single commit automatically as part of the integration. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.
@TheShermanTanker this pull request can not be integrated into master due to one or more merge conflicts. To resolve these merge conflicts and update this pull request you can run the following commands in the local repository for your personal fork:
git checkout hsdis
git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# resolve conflicts and follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push
@TheShermanTanker This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration!
@TheShermanTanker This pull request has been inactive for more than 8 weeks and will now be automatically closed. If you would like to continue working on this pull request in the future, feel free to reopen it! This can be done using the /open pull request command.