harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Pavel Pervov" <pmcfi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VM] On-demand class library parsing is ready to commit
Date Thu, 25 Dec 2008 14:55:10 GMT
Classes are added to class library from time to time. I'm not sure how
it can be possible to track these changes manually.


On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Wenlong Li <wenlong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, one more question: bootclasspath.properties is classlib
> specific file, why we could not make a vm specific file manually? Just
> curious to know the possible reason. :)
> thx,
> Wenlong
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Pavel Pervov <pmcfirst@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If this would be VM-side automatically produced configuration file...
>> WBR,
>>    Pavel.
>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Wenlong Li <wenlong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> btw, because adding new module is rare case, manually modifying the
>>> bootclasspath.properties is not an issue?
>>> If so, can I conclude adding another property file with same update
>>> frequency as bootclasspath would be fine as well?
>>> Pls kindly correct me if my understanding is wrong.
>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Pavel Pervov <pmcfirst@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Wenlong,
>>>> Note, that bootclasspath.properties is only changed on adding new
>>>> module. This is pretty rare occasion, I believe.
>>>> WBR,
>>>>    Pavel.
>>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 3:48 PM, Wenlong Li <wenlong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Thx for your advice. Alexey.
>>>>> Here I have one question: do you know how the bootclasspath.properties
>>>>> is maintained, manually or automatically?
>>>>> Another comment is I would like to treat the patch as DRLVM specific
>>>>> optimization, e.g., it targets for improving VM creation time. So that
>>>>> is possible to move all updates to DRLVM part to eliminate potential
>>>>> modularity and compatibility problem.
>>>>> thx,
>>>>> Wenlong
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Aleksey Shipilev
>>>>> <aleksey.shipilev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, Wenlong.
>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Wenlong Li <wenlong@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> btw, Alexey, Let's go back to discuss whether there is a need
>>>>>>> include this feature in Harmony, given 17% performance gain in
>>>>>>> when using your methodology. For windows test, I will double
check the
>>>>>>> backgroud process as you pointed out.
>>>>>> My opinion was already expressed after I had finished the tests from
>>>>>> my side: the boost can be achieved in specific conditions, so whether
>>>>>> it's worth including into Harmony really depends on how much mess
>>>>>> patch would introduce besides the "performance boost". From what
>>>>>> see, the patch obliges the maintainer to maintain the correct mapping
>>>>>> between jars and Java packages. This new feature is also spread
>>>>>> between Classlib and VM, but it seems like DRLVM specific. In this
>>>>>> case I would rather stay without the patch.
>>>>>> Personally (if I'll be committer) I would accept the patch with two
>>>>>> serious modifications:
>>>>>>  1. Stay within DRLVM, do not introduce this feature into Classlib,
>>>>>> get the thing tested and evolved on DRLVM side. Otherwise it might
>>>>>> break the compatibility with other VMs.
>>>>>>  2. Make the mapping generated automatically (during build process?)
>>>>>> to free the burden for maintainers.
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Aleksey.

View raw message