On 25/08/2016 6:19 PM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hello All,
Please find below the revised webrev below.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8161448/webrev.01/
Functional changes seem okay. Exception management seems consistent.
You have made numerous other incidental changes which not only make it
Alexander,
The fix is pretty good.
Some comments besides the bug 8164490 we already discussed.
test/serviceability/jdwp/AllModulesCommandTest.java
75 System.err.println("Could not launch the debuggee. Error: '" + line +
"'");
A suggestion to replace "Error: " => Error at line: "
Alexander,
The objectID size (and so, the moduleID size) must be always 8 bytes.
I think, the following fragments have errors:
JdwpCmd.java
80 protected void putRefId(long refId) {
81 if (Arch.is64()) {
82 data.putLong(refId);
83 } else {
84
Hi Alexander,
The error code 42 is INVALID_MODULE:
*INVALID_MODULE*
42
Invalid module.
It means that the moduleID passed to the JDWP is not correct.
So that we have to check if the moduleID format is correct for 32-bit.
The moduleID type is specified as:
*moduleID*
Thanks David.
-Sharath Ballal
-Original Message-
From: David Holmes
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 5:56 PM
To: Sharath Ballal; Dmitry Samersoff; serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8163346: Update jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java for better
diagnostic of timeout.
> On Aug 24, 2016, at 11:40 PM, Harsha Wardhana B
> wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> Please review modified webrev located at,
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8131061/webrev.02/
+1
Mandy
Thanks for the review Daniel.
-Harsha
On Thursday 25 August 2016 02:15 PM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
On 25/08/16 07:40, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hi All,
Please review modified webrev located at,
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8131061/webrev.02/
Regards
Harsha
Hi Harsha,
Looks good to me!
be
Hi Sharath,
I've taken a look at this refactoring of the test and it seems okay.
Thanks,
David
On 25/08/2016 8:14 PM, Sharath Ballal wrote:
Dmitry has reviewed this fix of changes in the testcase. Could anybody else
review it as a second reviewer ?
-Sharath Ballal
-Original Message-
Hi Sergey,
Most unfortunately, the test is failing on 32-bit machines only with
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8164490.
It may well be a test issue, so I appreciate your looking at the test source. I
was not able to locate any issue with the test and it runs fine on 64-bit
machines.
Dmitry has reviewed this fix of changes in the testcase. Could anybody else
review it as a second reviewer ?
-Sharath Ballal
-Original Message-
From: Sharath Ballal
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2016 9:57 PM
To: Dmitry Samersoff
Cc: Arvind Aprameya
Subject: RE: RFR: JDK-8163346: Update j
On 25/08/16 07:40, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hi All,
Please review modified webrev located at,
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8131061/webrev.02/
Regards
Harsha
Hi Harsha,
Looks good to me!
best regards,
-- daniel
On Wednesday 24 August 2016 11:28 AM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
On Wed
Hello All,
Please find below the revised webrev below.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8161448/webrev.01/
Regards
Harsha
On Wednesday 24 August 2016 11:48 AM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
Hi David,
On Tuesday 23 August 2016 12:41 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Harsha,
On 22/08/2016 6:30 PM, Hars
Thanks Staffan!
Marcus
On 08/25/2016 10:15 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
Looks ok to me.
/Staffan
On 25 aug. 2016, at 09:51, Marcus Larsson wrote:
On 08/23/2016 01:17 PM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
Hi,
Still looking for a Reviewer for this. (Rebased webrev in-place.)
Thanks,
Marcus
On 04/12/2
Looks ok to me.
/Staffan
> On 25 aug. 2016, at 09:51, Marcus Larsson wrote:
>
>
> On 08/23/2016 01:17 PM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Still looking for a Reviewer for this. (Rebased webrev in-place.)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> On 04/12/2016 04:14 PM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
>>>
On 08/23/2016 01:17 PM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
Hi,
Still looking for a Reviewer for this. (Rebased webrev in-place.)
Thanks,
Marcus
On 04/12/2016 04:14 PM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
Ping!
On 04/06/2016 08:46 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
Hi,
Please review the following patch to add a warning for
15 matches
Mail list logo
