Re: RFR of JDK-8160866: IntPrimitiveOpsTests.java still in ProblemList.txt while related bug has been closed

2016-07-05 Thread Michael Haupt
Hi Hamlin, thumbs up. Best, Michael > Am 06.07.2016 um 06:55 schrieb Hamlin Li : > > Would you please review the following patch which remove > IntPrimitiveOpsTests.java from ProblemList.txt? > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160866 > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mli/

RFR of JDK-8160866: IntPrimitiveOpsTests.java still in ProblemList.txt while related bug has been closed

2016-07-05 Thread Hamlin Li
Would you please review the following patch which remove IntPrimitiveOpsTests.java from ProblemList.txt? bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160866 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mli/8160866/webrev.00/ Thank you -Hamlin

Re: Semantics of VarHandle CAS methods

2016-07-05 Thread Martin Buchholz
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Hans Boehm wrote: > > > In C++ we have sequential consistency of the single memory location > holding > > an atomic (cache coherence). Should we say something about locations > > updated via a VarHandle? If you call weakCompareAndSetAcquire, then the > > spec s

Re: Semantics of VarHandle CAS methods

2016-07-05 Thread Martin Buchholz
On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Hans Boehm wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Martin Buchholz > wrote: > > One concrete proposal that removes a method: > > > > Replace > > weakCompareAndSetAcquire and weakCompareAndSetRelease with > > weakCompareAndSetAcquireRelease > > Using standard

Re: RFR 9: 8160848 : Add diagnostics to java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies

2016-07-05 Thread Martin Buchholz
OK, looks good. Good luck debugging! On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > Hi Martin, > > On 7/5/2016 3:38 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > Instead of unconditionally printing, why not print only when a zombie is > discovered? All the information should still be available, I think

Re: RFR 9: 8160848 : Add diagnostics to java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies

2016-07-05 Thread Roger Riggs
Hi Martin, On 7/5/2016 3:38 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: Instead of unconditionally printing, why not print only when a zombie is discovered? All the information should still be available, I think... I'm not sure what to trust since this has not been an issue until recently. In some local tests,

Re: RFR 9: 8160848 : Add diagnostics to java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies

2016-07-05 Thread Martin Buchholz
Instead of unconditionally printing, why not print only when a zombie is discovered? All the information should still be available, I think... here's some misleading indentation... +p2.waitFor(); +throw new Error(zombies + " zombies!"); On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:29

RFR 9: 8160848 : Add diagnostics to java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies

2016-07-05 Thread Roger Riggs
Please review adding diagnostics to an intermittently failing test; java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies.java. Recently, the Zombies test has started intermittently reporting 1 Zombies errors on Solaris. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-zombies-8160848/ The original issue is o

Re: RFR: JDK-8160829 - Remove ASMPool support from jlink

2016-07-05 Thread Paul Sandoz
> On 5 Jul 2016, at 16:18, Jim Laskey (Oracle) wrote: > > Much of the removed code seems unnecessary since the same functionality can > be accomplished with much simpler code. An example is provided with > ClassForNamePlugin.java (temporary.) A shipping byte code optimizer plugin > will be

Re: RFR: JDK-8160829 - Remove ASMPool support from jlink

2016-07-05 Thread Remi Forax
Hi jim, This code had a dependency of the private copy of ASM, so +1 to remove it. Rémi - Mail original - > De: "Jim Laskey (Oracle)" > À: "jigsaw-dev" , "core-libs-dev" > > Envoyé: Mardi 5 Juillet 2016 16:18:53 > Objet: RFR: JDK-8160829 - Remove ASMPool support from jlink > > Much o

RFR: JDK-8160829 - Remove ASMPool support from jlink

2016-07-05 Thread Jim Laskey (Oracle)
Much of the removed code seems unnecessary since the same functionality can be accomplished with much simpler code. An example is provided with ClassForNamePlugin.java (temporary.) A shipping byte code optimizer plugin will be supplied later. Additional changes to the plugin API will supply a

Re: RFR 8054213: Class name repeated in output of Type.toString()

2016-07-05 Thread Svetlana Nikandrova
Joe, I'll be glad to know your opinion. Thank you, Svetlana - Исходное сообщение - От: svetlana.nikandr...@oracle.com Кому: joe.da...@oracle.com Копия: core-libs-dev@openjdk.java.net Отправленные: Четверг, 30 Июнь 2016 г 19:45:24 GMT +03:00 Ирак Тема: Re: RFR 8054213: Class name repeate

Re: RFR[9]: 8158510: Add test cases to validate Annotation

2016-07-05 Thread shilpi.rast...@oracle.com
Thanks Alan and Paul !! Added the header http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8158510/webrev.04/ Regards, Shilpi On 7/5/2016 2:18 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 05/07/2016 09:44, Paul Sandoz wrote: On 5 Jul 2016, at 08:18, shilpi.rast...@oracle.com wrote: Hi All, Please review updated webrev

Re: RFR[9]: 8158510: Add test cases to validate Annotation

2016-07-05 Thread Alan Bateman
On 05/07/2016 09:44, Paul Sandoz wrote: On 5 Jul 2016, at 08:18, shilpi.rast...@oracle.com wrote: Hi All, Please review updated webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8158510/webrev.03/ +1 Paul. I think the copyright headers will need to be fixed up (to use the GPL headers) before t

Re: RFR[9]: 8158510: Add test cases to validate Annotation

2016-07-05 Thread Paul Sandoz
> On 5 Jul 2016, at 08:18, shilpi.rast...@oracle.com wrote: > > Hi All, > > Please review updated webrev > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~srastogi/8158510/webrev.03/ > +1 Paul.