Looks ok.
Thanks,
/Staffan
On 2 apr 2014, at 10:09, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
> Hi Shanliang,
>
> I'm fine with the proposed fix, although not a reviewer.
>
> On 2.4.2014 10:01, shanliang wrote:
>> Hope to get reviewed and to push this fix:
>>
>> 1) this is a fix for a bug labeled with "svc-n
Hi Shanliang,
I'm fine with the proposed fix, although not a reviewer.
On 2.4.2014 10:01, shanliang wrote:
Hope to get reviewed and to push this fix:
1) this is a fix for a bug labeled with "svc-nightly"
2) The current test must be useful. Yes the test could not be 100% sure
to test the bug J
Hope to get reviewed and to push this fix:
1) this is a fix for a bug labeled with "svc-nightly"
2) The current test must be useful. Yes the test could not be 100% sure
to test the bug JDK-6751643, but with its 2*1 resume repeatings it
would have big chance to hit the bug conditions, the f
Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
Thanks Shanliang, it is clear now.
The patch will get rid off the IOOBE but I have my doubts about what
the test actually tests. It is supposed to make sure that certain
operations will not throw NPE when the debugged thread is resumed
(from a concurrent debugger thre
Thanks Shanliang, it is clear now.
The patch will get rid off the IOOBE but I have my doubts about what the
test actually tests. It is supposed to make sure that certain operations
will not throw NPE when the debugged thread is resumed (from a
concurrent debugger thread) before the operation h
Erik Gahlin wrote:
I also like to understand better.
Possibly my previous reply was not clear enough or I missed something there.
The test was to test JDK-6751643 as I cited in the last mail, here is
the info from JDK-6751643 to which this test was developed:
--
This bug can only occur if
I also like to understand better.
I looked at this failure before and I couldn't see what was wrong, not
in the test or product.
Erik
Jaroslav Bachorik skrev 3/27/14 4:49 PM:
On 27.3.2014 15:49, shanliang wrote:
Hi,
The call
thr.frames(0, frames.size() - 1);
suffers a synchronization i
Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
On 27.3.2014 15:49, shanliang wrote:
Hi,
The call
thr.frames(0, frames.size() - 1);
suffers a synchronization issue, the size may be changed after
frames.size() returns.
Any idea why there is a synchronization issue? The code seems to be
intended to run only when
On 27.3.2014 15:49, shanliang wrote:
Hi,
The call
thr.frames(0, frames.size() - 1);
suffers a synchronization issue, the size may be changed after
frames.size() returns.
Any idea why there is a synchronization issue? The code seems to be
intended to run only when a breakpoint is hit and t
