On Dec 12, 2017, at 5:24 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>
> as per getByteCodeIndex() it needs to be able to store "-1" to indicate
> no-bci?
Yes, that's the essential requirement, to encode a "none" value.
FWIW, one natural way to do that here would be to make the int field
@Stable and have the acce
Hi Mandy,
On 13/12/2017 10:42 AM, mandy chung wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk10/webrevs/8193325/webrev.00/
This fixes the bug in hotspot that sets the bci field as int but it's of
short type and also StackFrameInfo to return a proper bci value. Coleen
suggests not to change set
What David said. :)
One other wrinkle: I ProblemList-ed the test a few days ago[1] in
jdk/jdk. AFAICT, that change is not yet in jdk/hs, so the changes
David's pushing can't be used to take the test back off of the
ProblemList. I figure I'll have to file a new issue, to be fixed in
jdk/jdk
On 12/12/17 4:18 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Mandy,
On 13/12/2017 10:12 AM, mandy chung wrote:
How do we pick the value 50? The JNI local refs are deleted in some
cases and it's unclear how 50 is computed. What if new properties
are added in the future?
IIRC Brent instrumented the localre
On 13/12/2017 10:41 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
What David said. :)
One other wrinkle: I ProblemList-ed the test a few days ago[1] in
I forgot about that :(
jdk/jdk. AFAICT, that change is not yet in jdk/hs, so the changes
David's pushing can't be used to take the test back off of the
Prob
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk10/webrevs/8193325/webrev.00/
This fixes the bug in hotspot that sets the bci field as int but it's of
short type and also StackFrameInfo to return a proper bci value. Coleen
suggests not to change set_bci to take jushort but instead do the cast
as in the
How do we pick the value 50? The JNI local refs are deleted in some
cases and it's unclear how 50 is computed. What if new properties are
added in the future?
Mandy
On 12/12/17 4:00 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Reviewed! :)
Thanks Brent!
I guess I can push these both now.
David
On 13/12/2017
Hi Mandy,
On 13/12/2017 10:12 AM, mandy chung wrote:
How do we pick the value 50? The JNI local refs are deleted in some
cases and it's unclear how 50 is computed. What if new properties are
added in the future?
IIRC Brent instrumented the localref methods to see how many were being
create
Reviewed! :)
Thanks Brent!
I guess I can push these both now.
David
On 13/12/2017 9:38 AM, Brent Christian wrote:
Hi,
Please review this small change to the System.initProperties() native
method.
The tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java has begun to fail due to
this warning being is
Hi,
Please review this small change to the System.initProperties() native
method.
The tools/launcher/TestXcheckJNIWarnings.java has begun to fail due to
this warning being issued:
WARNING: JNI local refs: 41, exceeds capacity: 40
at java.lang.System.initProperties(java.base/Native M
On 12/7/17 5:03 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
(I'm still trying to love this new API)
The changes to the jsr166 tck are fine.
I'm not convinced that the new implementation for ArrayList is progress. The
current implementation of toArray(T[]) does
// Make a new array of a's runti
Hi, Brian
The changes look fine to me.
I would have found the test case a little easier to follow if
"off"/"len" weren't named so similarly to "offset"/"length", but it's
not a big deal.
-Brent
On 12/11/17 12:47 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180451
ht
On Dec 12, 2017, at 11:42 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> int len = count - pos
> out.write(but, pos, len);
> pos = count;
> return len;
Indeed that is clearer.
Thanks,
Brian
> On 11 Dec 2017, at 12:47, Brian Burkhalter
> wrote:
>
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8180451
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8180451/webrev.00
>
> 1. Add overrides of readAllBytes(), readNBytes(), and transferTo().
> 2. Simplify parameter checks in read(byte[],int,int).
> 3. C
Good catch! I agree that it should not be final and the constant field
should be static. I will take JDK-8193325 and follow up this issue.
-1 is ambiguous but should be initialized to a valid index when filled
by the VM. We tried to keep it compact for footprint concern. Anyway I
will propo
Thanks Roger, Alan. I've pushed the changeset after re-ran the core tests.
-Joe
On 12/12/17, 8:47 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Joe,
Looks good; +1
Regards, Roger
On 12/11/2017 3:04 PM, Joe Wang wrote:
On 12/11/17, 11:18 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Joe,
The new tests using testng look good, a
Out of curiosity, I looked more at StackFrameInfo, and saw:
short bci is final and is only ever assigned to -1 in java code. What's up
with that? Ohh, it seems to be magically frobbed in hotspot:
void java_lang_StackFrameInfo::set_bci(oop element, int value) {
element->int_field_put(_bci_offs
On 12/12/2017 09:58 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
StringCoding.java:
private static void throwMalformed(int nb) {
throw new IllegalArgumentException("malformed input length : " + nb);
}
nb is the number of bytes of the *first* offending chunk of bytes(?); is this
information
generally useful?
Hi Mandy,
I have seen nothing obviously wrong with this patch.
Using tokens instead of a bunch of boolean variables is a
nice simplification IMO.
best regards,
-- daniel
On 07/12/2017 17:17, mandy chung wrote:
jdeps currently finds modules from the module path for analysis based on
the value
Hi Sherman,
On 2017-12-11 05:08, Xueming Shen wrote:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8184947/webrev
thanks for incorporating my suggestion!
It looks pretty good to me. While many parts is just code that has been
moved, this is
still a pretty big change, so I hope we can get at least ano
Hi Joe,
Looks good; +1
Regards, Roger
On 12/11/2017 3:04 PM, Joe Wang wrote:
On 12/11/17, 11:18 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
Hi Joe,
The new tests using testng look good, a few comments:
- BAOS/EncodingTest.java
70: The message gets printed if the condition is not true; so
"results do not
Hi Nishit,
Looks fine to me
Regards, Roger
On 12/11/2017 4:01 PM, Naoto Sato wrote:
Looks good to me.
Naoto
On 12/11/17 1:04 AM, Nishit Jain wrote:
Hi,
Please review the fix for JDK-8190278
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190278
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~nishjain
Hi guys!
We are also experiencing some odd issues here with
setCallSiteTargetNormal with Java8.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151981
Our cenario is:
- Web Application using Tomcat;
- 8 HTTP Threads;
- A single ScriptEngine for the whole application;
When a request hits the server, t
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 8:00 PM, John Rose wrote:
> I submit to you that such a factory is *not* an IntFunction, because
> that only creates half of an array (or 0.01% of one), the empty
> version that needs to be populated. A natural array factory API
> [...]
> The interface would look something
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 8:45 AM, David Lloyd wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:03 PM, mandy chung
> wrote:
> > On 12/11/17 6:31 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> >> Java has an unsigned 16 bit type. Could bci be of type "char" ?
> >
> > Yes but I think keeping it short is fine.
>
> Call me strange
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:03 PM, mandy chung wrote:
> On 12/11/17 6:31 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>> Java has an unsigned 16 bit type. Could bci be of type "char" ?
>
> Yes but I think keeping it short is fine.
Call me strange if you like, but I never liked using char as anything
other than a UT
Thanks!
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 3:53 PM, mandy chung wrote:
> I filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193325. I can sponsor
> this patch for you.
>
> --- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackFrameInfo.java
> +++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackFrameInfo.java
> @@
Hi Alan,
Javadoc combines documentation and support of a flag in the
way the flag handling is implemented. On the other side,
it prints the help message anyways if a wrong flag is presented
to it, so if you call it with -help you get the help message.
Therefore, in my original change where I tr
Joe, Thanks you for your response. I agree with you that the specification
says the underlying stream should not be closed. However, it is not clear
what was the reason for decided not to close the underlying stream. Also,
it is not evident at what point the underlying streams will get closed an
29 matches
Mail list logo
