Re: RFR(S) Solaris Full Debug Symbols (FDS) fix for 8033602 and 8034005

Thanks! I was still in need of a (R)eviewer and a Runtime team member so thanks for covering both... Dan On 11/12/14 8:10 PM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Dan, If you still need a Reviewer, looks okay to me. Thanks, David On 11/11/2014 10:00 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Greetings, I have a So

Re: RFR(S) Solaris Full Debug Symbols (FDS) fix for 8033602 and 8034005

Hi Dan, If you still need a Reviewer, looks okay to me. Thanks, David On 11/11/2014 10:00 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Greetings, I have a Solaris Full Debug Symbols (FDS) fix ready for review. Yes, it is a small fix, but it is in Makefiles so feel free to run screaming from the room... :-)

Re: [9] RFR (S) 6762191: Setting stack size to 16K causes segmentation fault

Hi Chris, Sorry for the delay. On 13/11/2014 5:44 AM, Chris Plummer wrote: Hi, I'm still looking for reviewers. As the change is to the launcher it needs to be reviewed by the launcher owner - which I think is serviceability (though also cc'd Kumar :) ). Launcher change, and your rational

JEP 228: Add More Diagnostic Commands

New JEP Candidate: http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/228 - Mark

Re: RFR(XS): JDK-8062037 java/lang/instrument/RetransformBigClass.sh should be quarantined

+1 Thanks, Serguei On 11/12/14 10:22 AM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Thumbs up on the quarantine. However, I think the bug reference in ProblemList.txt should be 8061177 and not the bug used to do the quarantine. Dan On 11/12/14 11:19 AM, olivier.lagn...@oracle.com wrote: Please review this

Re: RFR(XS): JDK-8062037 java/lang/instrument/RetransformBigClass.sh should be quarantined

Thumbs up on the quarantine. However, I think the bug reference in ProblemList.txt should be 8061177 and not the bug used to do the quarantine. Dan On 11/12/14 11:19 AM, olivier.lagn...@oracle.com wrote: Please review this addition to ProblemList.txt Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/brow

RFR(XS): JDK-8062037 java/lang/instrument/RetransformBigClass.sh should be quarantined

Please review this addition to ProblemList.txt Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062037 Initial Failure: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061177 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~olagneau/8062037/webrev.00/ Retransform/RedefineBigClass.sh have been showing again random

Re: Fwd: Re: RFR: 8062536: [TESTBUG] Conflicting GC combinations in jdk tests

Forgotten copyrights were changed http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~eistepan/8062536/webrev.04/ On 12.11.2014 20:07, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote: Hi Bengt, Please see comments inline On 12.11.2014 19:43, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2014-11-12 16:21, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote: Hi everyone! Since the deci

Re: Fwd: Re: RFR: 8062536: [TESTBUG] Conflicting GC combinations in jdk tests

Hi Bengt, Please see comments inline On 12.11.2014 19:43, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2014-11-12 16:21, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote: Hi everyone! Since the decision was made to change only tests which fail because of conflict for now (skip "selfish" tests), I post new webrev for jdk part of the J

Re: Fwd: Re: RFR: 8062536: [TESTBUG] Conflicting GC combinations in jdk tests

On 2014-11-12 16:43, Bengt Rutisson wrote: On 2014-11-12 16:21, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote: Hi everyone! Since the decision was made to change only tests which fail because of conflict for now (skip "selfish" tests), I post new webrev for jdk part of the JDK-8019361

Re: Fwd: Re: RFR: 8062536: [TESTBUG] Conflicting GC combinations in jdk tests

On 2014-11-12 16:21, Evgeniya Stepanova wrote: Hi everyone! Since the decision was made to change only tests which fail because of conflict for now (skip "selfish" tests), I post new webrev for jdk part of the JDK-8019361 : http://cr.openjdk

Re: Fwd: Re: RFR: 8062536: [TESTBUG] Conflicting GC combinations in jdk tests

Hi everyone! Since the decision was made to change only tests which fail because of conflict for now (skip "selfish" tests), I post new webrev for jdk part of the JDK-8019361 : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~avstepan/eistepan/8062536/webrev.03/ T