Hi all, On Fri, 2013-05-24 at 14:30 +1000, David Holmes wrote: > Thomas, > > Are we still waiting for a second core-libs reviewer on this?
Yes. Would some additional core-libs reviewer be so kind and look at this issue? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/7038914/webrev.3/ Thomas > > David > > On 17/05/2013 5:56 PM, Thomas Schatzl wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 10:47 +1000, David Holmes wrote: > >> On 16/05/2013 8:44 PM, Thomas Schatzl wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2013-05-13 at 13:55 +0200, Thomas Schatzl wrote: > >>>> I updated the test program and the patch in java.lang.ref.Reference > >>>> accordingly. > >>>> > >>>> As for the problem of reproducibility, in my tests I had a 100% > >>>> reproduction rate with the previous version of the test. > >>>> > >>>> However, now I also set -XX:-UseTLAB and -Xmx16M in the test program as > >>>> suggested in some other emails. > >>>> > >>>> I will report back with a new webrev after some testing on more > >>>> platforms as suggested by David. > >>> > >>> a new webrev for the patch is at > >>> > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/7038914/webrev.2/ > >> > >> I think the comment is somewhat confusing, but then the details here are > >> quite confusing. I guess the key part of this is that if OOME is thrown > >> we don't want to try and load InterruptedException - though I'm unclear, > >> based on normal exception processing semantics, when that might occur. > > > > I tried to clarify the comment a little; I also added a dummy > > instantiation of InterruptedException at the start of the test program > > to avoid OOME during class loading in this case as suggested by the > > other email. > > > > The new webrev is at > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~tschatzl/7038914/webrev.3/ > > > > I only compiled and tested this webrev that nothing broke locally, as > > the changes are minimal and mostly concerning comments. Pushing a jdk > > through jprt also takes a long time. > > > > Before sending you a patchset after it has been reviewed, I will push it > > through jprt again. > > > >> You can count me as a Reviewer and sponsor. I think only a second JDK/TL > >> Reviewer is needed here as no impact on hotspot. > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas > > > >
