On Wed, 8 Nov 2023 05:13:04 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Rename field from tracing to jfrTracing
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/event/ThrowableTracer.java line 62:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 11:11:31 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
>> Could I have a review of a PR that removes the bytecode instrumentation for
>> the exception events.
>>
>> Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr + tier1 + tier2
>
> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 20:27:06 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> I'm not sure if there is a clear reason to change the default value from 10
>> to 8. I'm fine if you want to keep to use value 10 for less compatibility
>> issues. Otherwise, I have no more comment. Thanks!
>>
>>> Yes, I can place the
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 23:20:04 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
> I am not sure that it is a good thing to modify the JDK when many tests are
> executed in parallel. But for now, I updated the test, it will be skipped if
> the setup stage fails.
This pull request has been closed without being
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 07:40:19 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> Yes, I can place the comments in the code blocks for the server-side setting
>> and client-side setting, respectively.
>> @XueleiFan Any feedback before I'm making this comment change?
>> I will also update the release note
In this PR, I included logic to skip tests on Oracle Linux prior to version 8.
The NSS binaries we are using for testing use a newer version of GLIBC than is
included with OL 7.9.
-
Commit messages:
- 8319128: sun/security/pkcs11 tests fail on OL 7.9 aarch64
Changes:
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 11:11:31 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
>> Could I have a review of a PR that removes the bytecode instrumentation for
>> the exception events.
>>
>> Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr + tier1 + tier2
>
> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 11:11:31 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
>> Could I have a review of a PR that removes the bytecode instrumentation for
>> the exception events.
>>
>> Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr + tier1 + tier2
>
> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since
> Could I have a review of a PR that removes the bytecode instrumentation for
> the exception events.
>
> Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr + tier1 + tier2
Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Rename field from tracing to jfrTracing
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 09:27:51 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> I filed an issue to investigate if there is a problem with SOE, or if the
>> OOM check is really needed now.
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319579
>>
>> Regardless of outcome, It would be good to document the results of the
>>
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 09:24:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove SecurityException and IllegalArgumentException from throws clause
>
>
On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 02:10:29 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> I filed an issue to investigate if there is a problem with SOE, or if the OOM
> check is really needed now. https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8319579
>
> Regardless of outcome, It would be good to document the results of the
>
On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 22:52:50 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
>> Could I have a review of a PR that removes the bytecode instrumentation for
>> the exception events.
>>
>> Testing: jdk/jdk/jfr + tier1 + tier2
>
> Erik Gahlin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since
13 matches
Mail list logo
