Hi again Ralf, :)
A few more comments after taking a closer look at the thread code.
On the surface it seems to me this is a case where it would be okay to
introduce a subclass of Thread that is not JavaThread nor NonJavaThread.
I see little point in subclassing NonJavaThread (via NamedThread)
Hi Ralf,
One part of this caught my eye and now I look at the webrev I have some
concerns. Introducing new threads to the VM is not something that should
be done lightly and it has to be done very carefully - I need to look
closer at this aspect. Further when using Mutexes/Monitors in such cod
Thanks, will do
--alex
On 02/10/2020 11:43, Chris Plummer wrote:
Hi Alex,
The changes look good. Please up the copyright in JdwpListenTest.java.
thanks,
Chris
On 2/7/20 2:06 PM, Alex Menkov wrote:
Updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amenkov/jdk15/JdwpTestsTeredo/webrev.02/
I decid
Thanks, will make all values 0x.. before push
--alex
On 02/10/2020 12:56, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Alex,
It looks okay to me.
Minor:
+ return bytes[0] == 0x20 && bytes[1] == 0x01 && bytes[2] == 00 &&
bytes[3] == 0; '00' looks strange, maybe you want something like this: +
return
Hi Chris,
in general it all looks good, I have a few comments (most of them are
editorial):
in Platform.java:
1. you have doubled spaced at line#238 (b/w boolean and isSignedOSX)
2. as FileNotFoundException is IOException, there is no need to declare the
former in the signature of isSignedOSX
3.
Hi Alex,
It looks okay to me.
Minor:
+return bytes[0] == 0x20 && bytes[1] == 0x01 && bytes[2] == 00 && bytes[3] == 0;
'00' looks strange, maybe you want something like this:
+return bytes[0] == 0x20 && bytes[1] == 0x01 && bytes[2] == 0x0 && byt
Ping #2. It's not that hard of a
review. Most of it is the new Platform.isSignedOSX() method, which
is well commented and pretty straight froward.
thanks,
Chris
On 2/4/20 5:04 PM, Chris Plummer wrote:
Ping!
Hi Alex,
The changes look good. Please up the copyright in JdwpListenTest.java.
thanks,
Chris
On 2/7/20 2:06 PM, Alex Menkov wrote:
Updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amenkov/jdk15/JdwpTestsTeredo/webrev.02/
I decided to go 2nd way.
--alex
On 02/06/2020 17:31, Chris Plummer wrote:
Hi Richard,
Thank you for the details on testing!
Two reviews has to be good enough unless anyone else did not want to
review it as well.
I guess, it is good to push.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 2/10/20 03:26, Reingruber, Richard wrote:
Hi Vladimir and Serguei,
thanks for looking at the change!
Hi Yasumasa,
> You can use `DCmdArgument` for -gz option.
That is what I originally tried. But then you always have to supply a
compression level (just specifying -gz doesn't work). Since I would expect most
users never caring about the compression level, I switched to a string option,
which
Hi Vladimir and Serguei,
thanks for looking at the change!
> What exact tests do you run to verify the fix?
The enhancement was tested running the JCK and JTREG tests which include many
JVMTI, JDI and JDWP tests.
To see if the tests cover this part of the JVMTI implementation I had removed
Hi Matthias,
I think this removal is ok. I can see that you tested the patch in our CI
without regressions. So +1 from my end.
Cheers
Christoph
From: serviceability-dev On
Behalf Of Baesken, Matthias
Sent: Donnerstag, 6. Februar 2020 17:06
To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net
Subject: [CAU
12 matches
Mail list logo
