On 13.2.2015 03:36, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Jaroslav,
Looks reasonable - but I can't vouch for MacOSX commands.
I am not a lucky Mac owner neither. I confirmed the format running the
test on the test farm Mac machines only.
Minor nit:
111 // total used free
On 2015-02-12, Alexander Smundak wrote:
It was the previous implementation that used the serviceability agent,
sorry for the confusion. The new one replicates the necessary
functionality of the serviceability agent instead. All the operations
on the debuggee (catching events, reading writing
Looks good for me!
-Dmitry
On 2015-01-29 22:42, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote:
Hello,
Review request for the backport of 8046282 to 8u:
Bug: JDK-8046282 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046282 SA
update
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8046282/webrev.00/
Thanks,
On 2015-02-13, Erik Helin wrote:
On 2015-02-12, Alexander Smundak wrote:
It was the previous implementation that used the serviceability agent,
sorry for the confusion. The new one replicates the necessary
functionality of the serviceability agent instead. All the operations
on the
Hi Poonam,
Looks good, thanks for backporting this.
Cheers
Markus
From: Poonam Bajaj Parhar
Sent: den 2 februari 2015 21:24
To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: Review request: Backport of JDK-8046282 to 8u
Hello,
Could I have reviews for these backported
Hello Staffan,
Yes, the changes apply cleanly.
I have also included the changes for
JDK-8049881: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049881 jstack
not working on core files
which was a regression introduced in jdk9 with the changes of 8046282.
Testing: JPRT, jstack with core and live
Looks good!
Thanks,
/Staffan
On 13 feb 2015, at 20:44, Poonam Bajaj Parhar poonam.ba...@oracle.com wrote:
Hello Staffan,
Yes, the changes apply cleanly.
I have also included the changes for
JDK-8049881: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049881 jstack not
working on core
Thanks Bertrand and John for explaining the invokedynamic issue, and
Vladimir for filing the bug.
I'll reply here (I don't have a JBS account; I would like one!).
The profilers I'm using (Linux perf, and Solaris DTrace) can already handle
a broken RBP, and we see this all the time when profiling
Thanks Staffan! And I really appreciate
all your reviews. Also thanks to Mikael for the DCMD test review.
Cheers,
Chris
On 2/12/15 1:19 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
Looks good!
Thanks for providing
On 2/13/15 2:28 PM, Brendan Gregg wrote:
G'Day Serguei,
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:26 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com
mailto:serguei.spit...@oracle.com serguei.spit...@oracle.com
mailto:serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
On 1/15/15 3:13 AM, Bertrand Delsart wrote:
On 14/01/2015
G'Day Serguei,
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 1:26 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com
serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
On 1/15/15 3:13 AM, Bertrand Delsart wrote:
On 14/01/2015 20:12, John Rose wrote:
On Jan 14, 2015, at 6:42 AM, Bertrand Delsart
bertrand.dels...@oracle.com
Hi Yasumasa,
On 2015-02-11 15:02, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
Hi all,
I've committed JDK-8068589 to add new GCCause - Diagnostic Command.
However, it has been backouted because test is failed [1] and it is not
considered
about concurrent GC: -XX:+ExplicitGCInvokesConcurrent [2].
I've created
12 matches
Mail list logo
