.
Thanks
Pavel Afremov.
But gc.Force and others became fail. The source, as I understand, is in
following: after mmap of the stack, java method Object.wait() can't
works. SuSE 10 hangs up, SuSE 9 makes exit on it
I'm just marveling over the fact you got gdb to work. Can anyone else
w
have a question: Is Xss flag significant feature or there are more
important things?
Pavel Afremov
As I understand Alexey means HARMONY-2073, but not HARMONY-2070.
Alexei, is it correct? If not, could you clarify the point about
exn_raise_by_name_internal in your initial letter, please?
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/8/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK thanks Pavel, I'll try the patch
Oh. It's cool fix for my stupid bug.
Thanks for Alexey very much.
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/15/06, Alexey Varlamov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pardon for my English - a bit sleepy already...
2006/11/15, Alexey Varlamov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Err, what I found is really trivial bug. But it took
On 11/13/06, Gregory Shimansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what is the point to have a test which would pass either way? Check
that it doesn't crash the VM, is it the only purpose for it?
I think yes. It should check that test doesn't crash VM if stack size isn't
enough.
Pasha Afremov.
Hello
I think that Stack test should print pass if no stack overflow error is
happened.
Test should check processing of this error but not existing of it.
Optimizing compiler can do very deep recursion unrolling, and SOE can happen
never in this case.
Thanks
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/13
. But strange misprint was fount in
the new test.
So I attach new fixed patch.
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/8/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Though I tried several times, I could not repro 2070 or Alexey's specific
problems. The test attached to 2018 repros, and that I think is enough.
Pavel
Hello.
Could you be so kind to check
*HARMONY-2018*https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2018
before start fixing and discussing this bug, please?
I reported it and provided a fix a week ago.
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/5/06, Fedotov, Alexei A [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rana
Rana,
Everything is correct in you description, but it looks like that *
HARMONY-2018* https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2018 should
fix described bug. I think Alexei will have a chance to check it.
Thank you.
Pavel Afremov.
On 11/6/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
No. It couldn't. I don't now any solution which can do it.
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/25/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/25/06, Pavel Afremov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your fix just switch off Finalization Work Balance Subsystem
Pavel, could Work Balance Subsystem
Good idea Mikhail!
I think I will base on it in my future solution.
I see only one negative side for it. Quantity of the treads increased by
one in normal situation.
Any ideas?
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/25/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Work Balance Subsystem task
circularity error exists. It's it.
I think, this fake error can happen in usual applications. But it can be
masked here or be covered by other issues...
Pavel Afremov
On 10/24/06, Salikh Zakirov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gregory Shimansky wrote:
Yes the test is synthetic. But the whole problem
Hi
I've developed two "impossible tests, which shows "fake" circularity errors. One test is more simple and use SecurityManager. The other is a bit more complex and usescustom ClassLoader. You can findthem in attachment.
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov
On 10/17/06, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL P
.
Mikhail could you summarize all issues which should be clarified and
possible solutions for these issues?
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/20/06, Pavel Pervov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Prerequisite: each component carries its own helpers (which means no
allocation helper in VM Core, for example
+1
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/21/06, Weldon Washburn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1
On 10/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're trying something a little different. I think Roy Fielding one
said something along the lines of when a community gets organized
enough to vote
there is
class MyLibraryClass {
int methodA();
void methodB(int);
}
Wrapper should be added
.
Class MyFastLibraryClass extends MyLibraryClass {
CallAddress getCallAddress(String methodName); // which returns fast
call addresses.
}
BR
Pavel Afremov
On 10/18/06, Xiao-Feng Li [EMAIL
) Use of special interface is right for security issues. It's not clear for
me how provide security in Mikhail scheme.
Thanks
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/18/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pavel,
I completely agree with Alex critics. But the thread is to discuss and to
find the best
on ia32).
Generics can be used for type safety.
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/17/06, Rana Dasgupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mikhail,
All this looks reasonable to me. At least to go ahead. Regarding 2A,
could the jit cache this information for re-use?
Alternatively, the JIT can do all
I' m going look into this.
Pavel Afremov.
On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it just seems to have gotten worse lately
Anyone working on a fix?
geir
Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
I have created a JIRA issue for this problem some time ago.
https
point is not really fix. I think it's workaround for cases when VM
can't create new exception object by different reasons. I suppose, VM can
raise pre created SOE in the case when stack overflow happen in suspend
disabled mode and stack can't be unwound destructively.
Pavel Afremov.
+1
Pavel Afremov
On 7/23/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All is in order and in SVN for Harmony-856 wrt BCC and ACQ.
Please vote to accept or reject this codebase into the Apache Harmony
class library :
[ ] + 1 Accept
[ ] -1 Reject (provide reason below)
Lets let this run
required anywhere? I think its
very
unlikely .
In any case if more deep recursion will be required in the future, we can
tune thread
stack size for windows build.
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov
Hi
On 7/22/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this must be a JIT heuristics because even a small method can lead
to inlining of whole classlib API :)
Are You think this check should be removed from VM and puted into JIT only?
BR
Pavel Afremov.
Hi Weldon.
There is a simple test in description of the
*HARMONY-945*https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-945
.
I can add this test in the smoke tests of DRLVM. Is it OK?
Pavel Afremov.
On 7/24/06, Mikhail Fursov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, I think that VM can do this check but use lower border: e.g. 1/100 of
initial.
JIT must do this check more accurate: use knowledge of algorithms it uses.
...
I think we can review this issue when the check appears in the JIT.
Pavel
Because more elegant decision wasn't proposed during current discussion, I'd
like to put the patch with results of my experiments into JIRA, as Stack
Overflow Implementation.
You can find it in
*HARMONY-945*https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-945.
Welcome to try it.
Pavel Afremov.
frame
correctly.
What do you think about this issue?
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
.
It's interesting idea.
BR
Pavel Afremov.
the first two commands of compiled
method, function unwind of the JIT cannot always unwind frame correctly.
Are there any ideas how to fix them?
I have some code developed locally, and can submit it to JIRA if anyone is
interested in trying it.
Thanks.
Pavel Afremov.
29 matches
Mail list logo
