From nobody Tue Sep 16 11:33:26 2025 X-Original-To: java@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTP id 4cR0CR5SBQz68qGq for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2025 11:33:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from haraldei@anduin.net) Received: from mail.anduin.net (mail.anduin.net [185.42.170.45]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPS id 4cR0CN75Xwz48TQ for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2025 11:33:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from haraldei@anduin.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=anduin.net header.s=dkim2021 header.b=GdvreXHA; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=anduin.net; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of haraldei@anduin.net designates 185.42.170.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=haraldei@anduin.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anduin.net; s=dkim2021; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ecAsqne9tqa+KeuHvL1KhjcEB/wLw/V8hHcTotL27EQ=; t=1758022416; x=1758886416; b=GdvreXHAJXyNfQ2WuXykRIG4ukoUufKWn2pE5mwzuZ+13ZZeludmMiIFy1jbTCGC8C2BCG9QAGg bclmwf3CiJEPzhL+WZKU5N2FAboz0ibiMDOJ+pBSMFpuEQhuA+szdmezuVyHpGk27nTIEgtFob5o4 SQMAs8Tz8Hay7kmo/p+JowY9RHaizsjeAf+C2ojViTMaOn90BV5ZKvG2BOnu9Lt6X9NgP+RWDiDXh HBCD++7E+Dw5FKBIlXicl1UgByGWiVDHqZjAl2WOQunT/zdc+8zYJf5TXaTlfMIG9XSld6H22G80K Z9xM+0T91t1tLkqExpRT3Uq9Gp68FRjW/2rQ==; Received: by mail.anduin.net with utf8esmtpsa (TLS1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.98.2 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1uyTw7-000000006hY-1ql5; Tue, 16 Sep 2025 11:33:29 +0000 Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 13:33:26 +0200 From: Harald Eilertsen To: Ronald Klop Cc: java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (solved, I think) Re: openjdk build failures on "nm" Message-ID: References: <1221594030.658.1756976173189@localhost> <1330428831.1750.1756980558066@localhost> <2053927433.1876.1757575928041@localhost> <387357483.2815.1757924099539@localhost> List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-java List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <387357483.2815.1757924099539@localhost> X-SA-Authenticated: Yes X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: - X-Spam-Report: host: mail.modirum.com | contact: hostmaster@modirum.com | scores: BAYES_00=-1.9,NO_RELAYS=-0.001 | autolearn=no autolearn_force=no, score=0 X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.50 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-0.999]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.998]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[anduin.net,reject]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:185.42.170.45/32]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[anduin.net:s=dkim2021]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:62248, ipnet:185.42.170.0/24, country:EE]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[haraldei]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[java@freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[anduin.net:+] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4cR0CN75Xwz48TQ Hi Ronald, On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 10:14:59AM +0200, Ronald Klop wrote: > The current construction in openjdk17 handles MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER > properly. And with that also the MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE variable. After more > testing we can use this blueprint in other openjdk ports. > Also in openjdk23 and -24. They don't have flapping builds but can > improve handling of MAKE_JOBS_NUMBER. Nice finds! I don't really have a strong opinion either way, but think it should probably be selectable whether to use (and how many) parallel jobs to run. I'm curious if there has been problems with this number of parallel jobs for other platforms as well. I'll try to ask around a bit. The OpenJDK build process does, as you say, determine how many jobs to spawn on it's own, based on available CPU cores and memory. Having the port Makefile trying to parallelize that further would get in the way of this, so we set MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE to prevent it. As I understand it, this should not prevent the OpenJDK build system to spawn parallel jobs. In addition to setting the --with-jobs config parameter, it's possible to tune this with the --with-num-cores and --with-memory-size to limit the number of jobs to not occupy the whole capacity of the machine. It would be interesting to know if there's any difference if we clamp number of cores it's allowed to use to f.ex. 16 or something. Will you be at EuroBSDCon or the FreeBSD dev summit? Could be interesting to dig into these things a bit there with some of the experts on the port system available too. Take care! Harald