8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 #23471

jianglizhou · 2025-02-05T19:41:51Z

Please review this change that adds a linux-x86-static job in GHA. The job builds the static-jdk-image release binary on linux-x64. Please see https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/build-dev/2025-February/048830.html for some additional context.

A debug build job (building static-jdk-image fastdebug binary) is not included currently. There is a known issue that causes build failure due to resource problem, which causes the fastdebug build fail in github workflow. Please see more related information in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8349399?focusedId=14749789&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14749789.

GHA: https://github.com/jianglizhou/jdk/actions/runs/13163673020

Progress

Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

JDK-8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Aleksey Shipilev (@shipilev - Reviewer)
Magnus Ihse Bursie (@magicus - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23471/head:pull/23471
$ git checkout pull/23471

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/23471
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/23471/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 23471

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 23471

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23471.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2025-02-05T19:42:30Z

👋 Welcome back jiangli! 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.

openjdk · 2025-02-05T19:42:51Z

@jianglizhou This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64

Reviewed-by: shade, ihse

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 1 new commit pushed to the master branch:

e43960a: 8350616: Skip ValidateHazardPtrsClosure in non-debug builds

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

openjdk · 2025-02-05T19:43:19Z

@jianglizhou The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

build

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

mlbridge · 2025-02-05T19:51:48Z

Webrevs

jianglizhou · 2025-02-06T16:54:30Z

@erikj79 @magicus Could you help review the GHA change for adding a static-jdk-image build? Thanks

shipilev · 2025-02-06T17:01:04Z

What's the difference between build-linux-static.yml and build-linux.yml? Can we just call build-linux.yml to do the static build?

jianglizhou · 2025-02-06T18:49:35Z

@shipilev Thanks for looking into this.

What's the difference between build-linux-static.yml and build-linux.yml? Can we just call build-linux.yml to do the static build?

Currently, the main difference is avoiding building static-libs-bundles completely in build-linux-static.yml, since that's not needed for the testing purpose with static-jdk-image. In build-linux.yml, there is the following logic that skips building static-libs-bundles but for fastdebug build only. I actually initially started using build-linux.yml for the static build job, but later added build-linux-static.yml when I was looking for a cleaner way to skipping building static-libs-bundles.

          # Only build static-libs-bundles for release builds.
          # For debug builds, building static-libs often exceeds disk space.
          STATIC_LIBS: ${{ matrix.debug-level == 'release' && 'static-libs-bundles' }}

jianglizhou · 2025-02-11T21:38:09Z

@shipilev Thanks for looking into this.

What's the difference between build-linux-static.yml and build-linux.yml? Can we just call build-linux.yml to do the static build?

Currently, the main difference is avoiding building static-libs-bundles completely in build-linux-static.yml, since that's not needed for the testing purpose with static-jdk-image. In build-linux.yml, there is the following logic that skips building static-libs-bundles but for fastdebug build only. I actually initially started using build-linux.yml for the static build job, but later added build-linux-static.yml when I was looking for a cleaner way to skipping building static-libs-bundles.
          # Only build static-libs-bundles for release builds.
          # For debug builds, building static-libs often exceeds disk space.
          STATIC_LIBS: ${{ matrix.debug-level == 'release' && 'static-libs-bundles' }}

@shipilev Can you help review/approve the change, if no other questions?

jianglizhou · 2025-02-18T23:49:07Z

I brought up this PR during today's hermetic Java meeting. There was a question asked about the time used for the static build job. Here is a comparison between linux-x64-static and existing linux-x64 jobs in GHA:

linux-x64-static / build (release): 29m 29s
linux-x64 / build (release): 35m 16s

shipilev · 2025-02-20T15:58:03Z

@shipilev Can you help review/approve the change, if no other questions?

Sorry for not looking at this sooner.

It looks to me that you are trying to work-around a little mess introduced by static-libs-bundles addition (JDK-8337265). Not your mess, but trying to avoid it introduces more headaches. I am somewhat surprised we even have static-libs-bundles as additional target in what I would consider a generic build-linux job! It looks cleaner to yank static-libs-bundles into a separate build job, which would then allow your PR to proceed by just calling build-linux normally, without introducing a wholly new job script. Let me try to fix static-libs-bundles first.

jianglizhou · 2025-02-20T18:17:11Z

@shipilev Can you help review/approve the change, if no other questions?

Sorry for not looking at this sooner.

It looks to me that you are trying to work-around a little mess introduced by static-libs-bundles addition (JDK-8337265). Not your mess, but trying to avoid it introduces more headaches. I am somewhat surprised we even have static-libs-bundles as additional target in what I would consider a generic build-linux job! It looks cleaner to yank static-libs-bundles into a separate build job, which would then allow your PR to proceed by just calling build-linux normally, without introducing a wholly new job script. Let me try to fix static-libs-bundles first.

Thank you, @shipilev! Fixing the build-linux first sounds good to me. I see you have PR already, thanks again!

In fact, there is a similar build resource (disk space) issue for the static job as well. It requires some work in both the runtime and build system to address the underlying problem that causes excessive build resource consumption. I created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8350450. @magicus has been looking into integrating (related runtime changes from hermetic-java-runtime branch) and fixing the issue in JDK mainline.

shipilev · 2025-02-21T08:39:53Z

Thank you, @shipilev! Fixing the build-linux first sounds good to me. I see you have PR already, thanks again!

Hey @jianglizhou, a quick question for you. There are two options for this PR:
~~1. Build both static-jdk-image and static-libs-bundle in the same linux-x64-static job from #23715~~
2. Build static-jdk-image and static-libs-bundle in different jobs

~~Which one would you prefer? I would prefer to test all static stuff in a single job (1), unless you disagree? If we decide now, it would allow me to name the job in #23715 properly from the start.~~ I think we are going for separate jobs, so the question is moot.

shipilev · 2025-02-26T15:02:08Z

#23715 should now be in. Now you can just add a clean separate job for this, like this one:

jdk/.github/workflows/main.yml

Lines 228 to 245 in bd112c4

    
           build-linux-x64-static-libs: 
        
             name: linux-x64-static-libs 
        
             needs: prepare 
        
             uses: ./.github/workflows/build-linux.yml 
        
             with: 
        
               platform: linux-x64 
        
               make-target: 'static-libs-bundles' 
        
               # Only build static-libs-bundles for release builds. 
        
               # For debug builds, building static-libs often exceeds disk space. 
        
               debug-levels: '[ "release" ]' 
        
               gcc-major-version: '10' 
        
               configure-arguments: ${{ github.event.inputs.configure-arguments }} 
        
               make-arguments: ${{ github.event.inputs.make-arguments }} 
        
               # Upload static libs bundles separately to avoid interference with normal linux-x64 bundle. 
        
               # This bundle is not used by testing jobs, but downstreams use it to check that 
        
               # dependent projects, e.g. libgraal, builds fine. 
        
               bundle-suffix: "-static-libs" 
        
             if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64-variants == 'true'

And then you don't need a whole new script for static-jdk build.

…ve build-linux-static.yml.

shipilev

Cool, one nit:

shipilev · 2025-02-26T17:58:08Z

.github/workflows/main.yml

@@ -168,6 +168,19 @@ jobs:
      make-arguments: ${{ github.event.inputs.make-arguments }}
    if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64 == 'true'

+  build-linux-x64-static-jdk:


Move this closer to build-linux-x64-static-libs? These are somewhat related, at least in their need for debug-levels: release. Probably copy a comment about debug-level there.

Also maybe just build-linux-x64-static? -jdk feels a bit redundant. I see you had it before, would you still prefer ...-static-jdk?

Thanks for the quick look, @shipilev! Also, thanks for separating the static-libs-bundle with #23715. I haven't responded to your earlier comment as I wanted to wait for the GHA testing results.

I renamed to ...-static-jdk to be more consistent with the new ...-static-libs job. build-linux-x64-static still sounds fine to me, I'll rename it back.

@shipilev Updated based on your suggestions.

…move close to build-linux-x64-static-libs, for addressing shipilev's suggestions.

shipilev · 2025-02-26T19:44:50Z

.github/workflows/main.yml

+      make-arguments: ${{ github.event.inputs.make-arguments }}
+    if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64 == 'true'


Ah, one more trouble: this job produces bundles. But that bundle name is just linux-x64, which overrides the standard bundle. See how build-linux-x64-static-libs overrides bundle-suffix:, do the same here. E.g. bundle-suffix: "-static"?

Ah, one more trouble: this job produces bundles. But that bundle name is just linux-x64, which overrides the standard bundle. See how build-linux-x64-static-libs overrides bundle-suffix:, do the same here. E.g. bundle-suffix: "-static"?

The current build-linux-x64-static job doesn't produce any bundles.

I do agree with your point on overriding the bundle name, as we probably want to include bundle creation in the job at some later point. I actually ran into GHA failure initially when I used the build-linux.yml for the job due to bundle name conflict before your #23715 change. Updating to include your suggestion for the bundle name...

shipilev

OK, this looks fine. See if @magicus agrees as well.

magicus

Yeah, looks good. Thanks @shipilev and @jianglizhou for getting this better solution than the initial proposal.

jianglizhou · 2025-02-26T23:22:28Z

@shipilev @magicus Thanks!

jianglizhou · 2025-02-26T23:22:52Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2025-02-26T23:23:44Z

Going to push as commit 78c18cf.
Since your change was applied there has been 1 commit pushed to the master branch:

e43960a: 8350616: Skip ValidateHazardPtrsClosure in non-debug builds

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2025-02-26T23:23:51Z

@jianglizhou Pushed as commit 78c18cf.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

jianglizhou added 7 commits February 4, 2025 15:29

Add build-linux-x64-static build job in GHA.

cbc8e83

Add build-linux-static.yml.

e09dca1

Add build-linux-static.yml.

cdd4c0c

Set debug-levels to "debug".

9544ad0

Set debug-levels to "release".

ea39223

Remove debug build for now.

94a1ca8

Set matrix.

503285b

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Feb 5, 2025

openjdk bot added the build build-dev@openjdk.org label Feb 5, 2025

shipilev mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2025

8350443: GHA: Split static-libs-bundles into a separate job #23715

Closed

4 tasks

jianglizhou added 2 commits February 26, 2025 09:38

Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8349399

1e9bc52

Rename build-linux-x64-static job to build-linux-x64-static-jdk. Remo…

385c0bc

…ve build-linux-static.yml.

shipilev reviewed Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Rename build-linux-x64-static-jdk back to build-linux-x64-static and …

6d637c9

…move close to build-linux-x64-static-libs, for addressing shipilev's suggestions.

shipilev suggested changes Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Override the default bundle name as suggested by shipilev.

91d4c9a

shipilev approved these changes Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Feb 26, 2025

magicus approved these changes Feb 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot closed this Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Feb 26, 2025

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 #23471

8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 #23471

jianglizhou commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 5, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

openjdk bot commented Feb 5, 2025

mlbridge bot commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jianglizhou commented Feb 6, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 6, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 6, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 11, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 18, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 20, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 20, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

shipilev commented Feb 26, 2025

shipilev left a comment

shipilev Feb 26, 2025

shipilev Feb 26, 2025

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

shipilev Feb 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

shipilev left a comment

magicus left a comment

jianglizhou commented Feb 26, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 26, 2025

		make-arguments: ${{ github.event.inputs.make-arguments }}
		if: needs.prepare.outputs.linux-x64 == 'true'

8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 #23471

8349399: GHA: Add static-jdk build on linux-x64 #23471

Conversation

jianglizhou commented Feb 5, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 5, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 5, 2025 • edited Loading

openjdk bot commented Feb 5, 2025

mlbridge bot commented Feb 5, 2025 • edited Loading

Webrevs

jianglizhou commented Feb 6, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 6, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 6, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 11, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 18, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 20, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 20, 2025

shipilev commented Feb 21, 2025 • edited Loading

shipilev commented Feb 26, 2025

shipilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shipilev Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shipilev Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shipilev Feb 26, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jianglizhou Feb 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shipilev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

magicus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jianglizhou commented Feb 26, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 26, 2025

openjdk bot commented Feb 26, 2025

jianglizhou commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Feb 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading

shipilev commented Feb 21, 2025 •

edited

Loading

shipilev Feb 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading