JDK 9 RFR of JDK-8161347: Mark java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies.java as intermittently failing

java/lang/ProcessBuilder/Zombies.java This test is known to fail intermittently (JDK-8160151), this patch is to mark the test accordingly with keyword 'intermittent'. (Note that this test has been demoted to tier2.) bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161347 webrev: http://cr.openjd

RFR: 8140723: Remove source code conditionalized on JAVASE_EMBEDDED

The bug report for this is confidential but quite simply all of the little tweaks and knobs we added to the open build and source files to support the Java SE Embedded product no longer need to be there for JDK 9. Many of them have already been removed via other changes but this cleans up the r

Re: RFR: 9: 8161011: Mark test/java/rmi/activation/ActivationGroup/downloadActivationGroup/DownloadActivationGroup.java as itnermittent

Looks OK. Brian On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:35 PM, Rajan Halade wrote: > Ping > > I extended this to include two more tests to be marked as intermittent. > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rhalade/8161011/webrev.00/

Re: RFR JDK-7031075: GZIPInputStream's available() reports 1, but read() gives -1.

Hi Sherman, This looks fine: +1. Brian On Jul 13, 2016, at 2:54 PM, Xueming Shen wrote: > webrev has been updated to use jdk.testlibrary.RandomFactory to > create the Random object for the test case, as Brian suggested. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/7031075/webrev

Re: Review Request: JDK-8157464: StackWalker.getCallerClass() should not filter out non-invoker frames

I considered that and it’s possible and that would simplify the VM logic would be a good thing (do the filtering in the library as much as possible). This would need to fill an array of MemberName rather than Class object. MemberName would need to provide a way to determine if it’s a hidden met

Re: RFR JDK-7031075: GZIPInputStream's available() reports 1, but read() gives -1.

webrev has been updated to use jdk.testlibrary.RandomFactory to create the Random object for the test case, as Brian suggested. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/7031075/webrev Thanks! Sherman On 07/13/2016 11:42 AM, Pavel Rappo wrote: Now you have to wait for a _R_eviewer, which I'm not. T

Re: RFR: 9: 8161011: Mark test/java/rmi/activation/ActivationGroup/downloadActivationGroup/DownloadActivationGroup.java as itnermittent

Ping I extended this to include two more tests to be marked as intermittent. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rhalade/8161011/webrev.00/ Thanks, Rajan On 7/7/16 3:59 PM, Rajan Halade wrote: This test is seen to fail intermittently due to JDK-8085192. Please review following patch which

Re: JEP 293: Guidelines for JDK Command-Line Tool Options

On 7/7/16 12:16 PM, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote: New JEP Candidate: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/293 Hi Jon, Good writeup and rundown of the issues. I have a few questions to raise. options can allow an argument to be provided This describes an option with an optional argument. I rec

Re: RFR JDK-7031075: GZIPInputStream's available() reports 1, but read() gives -1.

Now you have to wait for a _R_eviewer, which I'm not. Thanks. > On 13 Jul 2016, at 18:57, Xueming Shen wrote: > > Hi Pavel, > > The test case has been updated accordingly (added GIS and updated > the "summary" as suggested). > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/7031075/webrev/ > > I don't

Re: RFR JDK-7031075: GZIPInputStream's available() reports 1, but read() gives -1.

Hi Pavel, The test case has been updated accordingly (added GIS and updated the "summary" as suggested). http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/7031075/webrev/ I don't have a strong feeling to against to add inf.needsDirectory() for available() to return zero. Just feel it might be better to keep

Fwd: CompletableFuture eventual race condition

-- Forwarded message -- From: Francois Green Date: Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 3:22 PM Subject: Re: CompletableFuture eventual race condition To: Martin Buchholz I'm sorry for not posting the complete example. The claim was, given enough trials, this program will eventually fail to pr

Re: Review request: JDK-8160398 (jdeps) Replace a list of JDK 8 internal API for detecting if it's removed in JDK 9 or later

On 13/07/16 11:48, Mandy Chung wrote: On Jul 13, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > > Hi Mandy, > > I have not finished reviewing yet - but as early feedback I believe > that the following probably has a mistake: > > jdk.jdeps/share/classes/com/sun/tools/jdeps/Analyzer.java > > 392 > 393

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

Kindly reminder. On 07.07.2016 18:49, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: Hello all, seems like Joe is busy right now, so meanwhile I'll be happy to hear other opinions on this topic. Thank you, Svetlana On 30.06.2016 19:44, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: Hello Joe, thank you for your advice! GenericS

Re: Review Request: JDK-8157464: StackWalker.getCallerClass() should not filter out non-invoker frames

Hi Mandy, I wonder whether intermediate frames should be skipped always, whether the method is @CS or not. Indeed StackWalker::getCallerClass() is intented to be called from methods that are not @CS. If so the code in stackwalk.cpp could probably be simplified to simply look at method->is_ignore

Re: RFR: 8132379: -J options can cause crash or "Warning: app args parsing error passing arguments as-is"

Kumar, Thanks for the review. Cheers, Henry On July 13, 2016 at 6:43:09 AM, Kumar Srinivasan (kumar.x.sriniva...@oracle.com) wrote: > > Henry, > > Thanks for fixing this. Looks good. > > Kumar > > > Hi, > > > > Please review a fix for JDK-8132379, the fix is to build matching index to > >

Re: RFR: 8132379: -J options can cause crash or "Warning: app args parsing error passing arguments as-is"

Henry, Thanks for fixing this. Looks good. Kumar Hi, Please review a fix for JDK-8132379, the fix is to build matching index to the original arguments for the application arguments, used later for the sanity check and wildcard expansion. The fix is specific to Windows platform. -J prefix

Re: RFR(S): 8160564: TEST: Add a test to check the implementation of VersionProps.versionNumbers()

Thanks Iris! On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 9:01 PM, Iris Clark wrote: > Hi. > >>> Please find the new webrev at: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8160564.v2/ >> >> +1 >> >>> Any other comments? > >> Only to note that this adds a validation check that we don't have >> trailing ze

RFR(S): 8161212: Test times out: java/lang/invoke/LoopCombinatorLongSignatureTest.java

Dear all, please review this fix. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161212 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8161212/webrev.00/ Running the test in LambdaForm interpretation mode takes a long time. As the test is actually about capturing excessively long loop clause lists,

Review Request: JDK-8157464: StackWalker.getCallerClass() should not filter out non-invoker frames

Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk9/webrevs/8157464/webrev.00/index.html StackWalker::getCallerClass() is specified to return the invoker of the MethodHandle and java.lang.reflect.Method for the method calling StackWalker::getCallerClass(). StackWalker::getCallerClass() is not use

Re: Review request: JDK-8160398 (jdeps) Replace a list of JDK 8 internal API for detecting if it's removed in JDK 9 or later

> On Jul 13, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > > Hi Mandy, > > I have not finished reviewing yet - but as early feedback I believe > that the following probably has a mistake: > > jdk.jdeps/share/classes/com/sun/tools/jdeps/Analyzer.java > > 392 > 393 if (!jdk8Internals.cont

Re: RFR: 8158295 Add a multi-release jar validation mechanism to jar tool

> On 7 Jul 2016, at 22:32, Steve Drach wrote: > > Hi, > > Please review the following: > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sdrach/8158295/webrev.01/ > > issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8158295 >

Re: RFR - 8141148: LDAP "follow" throws ClassCastException with Java 8

It looks like it was a defect in the original generification done in 7072353. Looks okay to me. Thanks. > On 12 Jul 2016, at 22:13, Rob McKenna wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Looking for a review for this change: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8141148 > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm

Re: RFR JDK-7031075: GZIPInputStream's available() reports 1, but read() gives -1.

> On 13 Jul 2016, at 00:12, Xueming Shen wrote: > > (as I commented in the bug report) Sorry, I didn't see this. I should've been more careful. On other topics. 1. Original bug refers to GZIPInputStream's behaviour, not InflaterInputStream's. That said, I think it's fair to ask the test to

Re: Review request: JDK-8160398 (jdeps) Replace a list of JDK 8 internal API for detecting if it's removed in JDK 9 or later

Hi Mandy, I have not finished reviewing yet - but as early feedback I believe that the following probably has a mistake: jdk.jdeps/share/classes/com/sun/tools/jdeps/Analyzer.java 392 393 if (!jdk8Internals.contains(pn)) { 394 return false; 395 } 396

Re: Create java.util.stream.Stream from Iterator / Enumeration

Hi Patrick, > On 12 Jul 2016, at 21:25, Patrick Reinhart wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > I finally got the time to create the enhancement issue JDK-8161230 for > the alternative methods returning a Stream instead of an Enumeration. > Ok. I see some comments already by Stuart and Alan, and concur wit