On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 18:15:29 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This PR addresses [8338014](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338014)
> improving the use of `@jvms` tags by adding `JVMS` prior to the tag.
>
> Thanks,
> Sonia
This pull request ha
On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 18:55:47 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Looks fine; increasing review count to also include someone who more
>> directly maintains this API.
>>
>> If you haven't done so already, I recommend also doing a quick check for an
>> analagous issue with `@jls` tags in this API.
>
>> @jd
> Hi all,
>
> This PR addresses [8338014](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338014)
> improving the use of `@jvms` tags by adding `JVMS` prior to the tag.
>
> Thanks,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with two
additional c
Hi all,
This PR addresses [8338014](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338014)
improving the use of `@jvms` tags by adding `JVMS` prior to the tag.
Thanks,
Sonia
-
Commit messages:
- Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into JDK-8338014
- Copyright update
- 8338014: Improve usage
Hi all,
This PR addresses [8337667](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8337667) .
The `Compiler.perfmap` test case is failing on mac and windows as it is only
enabled in linux. I am removing this test case and noting that this use case is
already tested in
[test/hotspot/jtreg/serviceability
his PR can’t
> address that.
>
> Testing:
>
> - [x] Added test case passes.
> - [x] Modified existing VM.cds tests to also check for `%p` filenames.
>
> Looking forward to your comments and addressing any diagnostic commands I
> might have missed
Hi all,
This PR addresses [8334492](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334492)
enabling jcmd diagnostic commands that issue an output file to accept the `%p`
pattern in the file name and substitute it for the PID.
This PR addresses the following diagnostic commands:
- [x] Compiler.perfmap
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:59:35 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This PR addresses [JDK-808](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-808)
> enabling `javap -system` to handle internal class names.
>
> Thanks,
> Sonia
This pull request has now been i
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:59:35 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This PR addresses [JDK-808](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-808)
> enabling `javap -system` to handle internal class names.
>
> Thanks,
> Sonia
Hi everyone, thanks for taking
Hi all,
This PR addresses [JDK-808](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-808)
enabling `javap -system` to handle internal class names.
Thanks,
Sonia
-
Commit messages:
- 808: javap --system handling doesn't work on internal class names
Changes: https://git.openjdk.o
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:25:02 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This PR aims to fix
> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>
> I think the regression got introduced in
> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458
On Fri, 31 May 2024 14:34:16 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
>> Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Decreasing diff size addressing unnecessary changes
>
> Hi all,
>
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
brought in by the me
On Thu, 9 May 2024 19:52:12 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This PR aims to fix
>> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>>
>> I think the regression got introduced in
>> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openj
On Sun, 12 May 2024 18:52:30 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> This mostly looks good. I'm just puzzled CHECK_EXCEPTION_NULL_FAIL. The JNI
> functions GetStaticMethodID, GetMethodID and NewObject return NULL with a
> pending exception when they fail. So I would expect CHECK_EXCEPTION_NULL_FAIL
> to j
On Wed, 8 May 2024 09:37:58 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
> This may be food for another RFE, to keep this patch minimal. But a good
> solution, to me, would be like this:
>
> * have the same logic for return codes (1 = error, 0 = success) to ease
> understanding
> * have clearly named constants (
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Decreasing diff size addressing unnecessary change
On Mon, 6 May 2024 19:06:10 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This PR aims to fix
>> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>>
>> I think the regression got introduced in
>> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openj
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Fixing indentation
Co-authored-by: ExE Boss <388901
On Mon, 6 May 2024 16:30:11 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This PR aims to fix
>> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>>
>> I think the regression got introduced in
>> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openj
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Fixing broken uncaught exception mechanism
-
On Mon, 6 May 2024 10:21:12 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Hi @mlchung, thanks for the feedback! I’ve pushed the updates.
>>
>> Just a question about ```NULL_CHECK0```.
>>
>> ```NULL_CHECK0``` reports the error message and then the exception is
>> described in ```CHECK_EXCEPTION_LEAVE```. This r
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Make deleting file OS agnostic
-
Changes:
- al
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with two
additional commits since the last revision:
- Adding test case
- Removing long lines
-
Chan
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Using new macro to avoid reporting JNI error
-
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 17:04:30 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> @lahodaj
>>
>>> I would suggest to take the test from 18753 though - doing a change like
>>> this without a test may lead to hard-to-find regressions in the future.
>>> (Note the current test should guard against both JDK-8329420 and
>>
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Changes based on feedback
-
Changes:
- al
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Fixing space formatting
-
Changes:
- all: htt
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:25:02 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This PR aims to fix
> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>
> I think the regression got introduced in
> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458
``LauncherHelper#getMainType``` but I'm looking
> forward to your suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> Sonia
Sonia Zaldana Calles has updated the pull request incrementally with three
additional commits since the last revision:
- Adding test case
- Removing the need to call mainType
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:34:24 GMT, Jan Lahoda wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This PR aims to fix
>> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>>
>> I think the regression got introduced in
>> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458).
>>
>> In the issue linked
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:25:02 GMT, Sonia Zaldana Calles
wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> This PR aims to fix
> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>
> I think the regression got introduced in
> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458
On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 06:30:55 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> This PR aims to fix
>> [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
>>
>> I think the regression got introduced in
>> [JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458).
>>
>> In the issue link
Hi folks,
This PR aims to fix [JDK-8329581](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329581).
I think the regression got introduced in
[JDK-8315458](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8315458).
In the issue linked above,
[LauncherHelper#getMainType](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/16461/fi
34 matches
Mail list logo
