Re: RFR: 8286212: Cgroup v1 initialization causes NPE on some systems [v2]

2022-05-16 Thread Ioi Lam
On Thu, 12 May 2022 18:09:40 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >> Please review this change to the cgroup v1 subsystem which makes it more >> resilient on some of the stranger systems. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to >> re-create a similar system as the reporter. The idea of using the longest >>

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v9]

2022-05-16 Thread David Holmes
On Mon, 16 May 2022 15:14:25 GMT, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> A gist of the fix is to allow relaxed special handling of code blob lookup >> when done for ASGCT. >> >> Currently, a guarantee will fail when we happen to hit a zombie method which >> is still on stack. While this would indicate

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v9]

2022-05-16 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
> A gist of the fix is to allow relaxed special handling of code blob lookup > when done for ASGCT. > > Currently, a guarantee will fail when we happen to hit a zombie method which > is still on stack. While this would indicate a serious error for the normal > execution flow, in case of ASGCT

Re: RFR: 8244681: Add a warning for possibly lossy conversion in compound assignments [v8]

2022-05-16 Thread Adam Sotona
> Please review this patch adding new lint option, **lossy-conversions**, to > javac to warn about type casts in compound assignments with possible lossy > conversions. > > The new lint warning is shown if the type of the right-hand operand of a > compound assignment is not assignment

Re: RFR: 8244681: Add a warning for possibly lossy conversion in compound assignments [v7]

2022-05-16 Thread Adam Sotona
> Please review this patch adding new lint option, **lossy-conversions**, to > javac to warn about type casts in compound assignments with possible lossy > conversions. > > The new lint warning is shown if the type of the right-hand operand of a > compound assignment is not assignment

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v6]

2022-05-16 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On Sat, 7 May 2022 04:59:44 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote: >> Jaroslav Bachorik has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and >> previous commits have been removed. The incremental views will show >> differences compared to the previous content of the PR. The pull request >> contains one

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v8]

2022-05-16 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
On Mon, 16 May 2022 08:49:40 GMT, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> A gist of the fix is to allow relaxed special handling of code blob lookup >> when done for ASGCT. >> >> Currently, a guarantee will fail when we happen to hit a zombie method which >> is still on stack. While this would indicate

Re: RFR: 8281268: Resolve duplication of test ClassTransformer class

2022-05-16 Thread Kevin Walls
On Fri, 13 May 2022 22:50:11 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote: > The fix deletes ClassTransformer class from jdi, switches all the test to > jdk.test.lib copy. Looks good. Those are the only imports I can see for this, and the ClassTransformer.java text is the same in both places. -

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v8]

2022-05-16 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
> A gist of the fix is to allow relaxed special handling of code blob lookup > when done for ASGCT. > > Currently, a guarantee will fail when we happen to hit a zombie method which > is still on stack. While this would indicate a serious error for the normal > execution flow, in case of ASGCT

Re: RFR: 8283849: AsyncGetCallTrace may crash JVM on guarantee [v7]

2022-05-16 Thread Jaroslav Bachorik
> A gist of the fix is to allow relaxed special handling of code blob lookup > when done for ASGCT. > > Currently, a guarantee will fail when we happen to hit a zombie method which > is still on stack. While this would indicate a serious error for the normal > execution flow, in case of ASGCT