On Sat, 27 May 2023 20:21:46 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> Disable test
> java/util/concurrent/locks/Lock/OOMEInAQS.java
> Test provokes OOME and might catch it in an unexpected location. It looks
> like an issue similar to https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8298066.
> However, generally the OOM
On Wed, 17 May 2023 12:28:47 GMT, Artem Semenov wrote:
> When using the clang compiler to build OpenJDk on Linux, we encounter various
> "warnings as errors".
> They can be fixed with small changes.
All of the -Wformat-nonliteral changes make me wonder why we're seeing these
with clang but not
On Fri, 26 May 2023 07:48:06 GMT, Daniel JeliĆski wrote:
> According to our docs, [clang is a supported compiler for
> Linux](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/doc/building.md#native-compiler-toolchain-requirements).
I think that's aspirational rather than actual. Clang has been inclu
Disable test
java/util/concurrent/locks/Lock/OOMEInAQS.java
Test provokes OOME and might catch it in an unexpected location. It looks like
an issue similar to https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8298066. However,
generally the OOME might be thrown mount/umount or in unparker thread. There
are no
On Sat, 27 May 2023 11:50:11 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>>> This one is not just to get rid of a warning. We get real test errors
>>> because malloc gets replaced by vec_malloc in log tags.
>>
>> That does not invalidate my argument, nor does it answer my question. Those
>> test errors could be
On Sat, 27 May 2023 11:25:41 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> This one is not just to get rid of a warning. We get real test errors
>> because malloc gets replaced by vec_malloc in log tags.
>
>> This one is not just to get rid of a warning. We get real test errors
>> because malloc gets replaced b
On Fri, 26 May 2023 20:27:12 GMT, Martin Doerr wrote:
> This one is not just to get rid of a warning. We get real test errors because
> malloc gets replaced by vec_malloc in log tags.
That does not invalidate my argument, nor does it answer my question. Those
test errors could be also fixed by
On Fri, 26 May 2023 23:58:12 GMT, Andrei Pangin wrote:
> When testing the proposed patch, I stumbled upon two (related) issues:
Thanks for bringing this up. The question is whether dynamically loading the
same same agent library N times is treated as one or N agents. Similarly, if an
agent lib