Thanks, Staffan!
Jiangli
On 08/26/2013 01:13 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
Looks good.
Thanks,
/Staffan
On 23 aug 2013, at 23:49, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
Hi,
Please review the fix for 8023477:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8023477/webrev.00/
Both tests reported by the bug failed due to
Looks good.
Thanks,
/Staffan
On 23 aug 2013, at 23:49, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please review the fix for 8023477:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8023477/webrev.00/
>
> Both tests reported by the bug failed due to the same problem. They both are
> passing now.
>
> The origin
Thanks again, Serguei!
Jiangli
On 08/23/2013 03:27 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi Jiangli,
The fix looks good and safe.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 8/23/13 2:49 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
Hi,
Please review the fix for 8023477:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8023477/webrev.00/
Both t
Hi Jiangli,
The fix looks good and safe.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 8/23/13 2:49 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
Hi,
Please review the fix for 8023477:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8023477/webrev.00/
Both tests reported by the bug failed due to the same problem. They
both are passing now.
The o
Hi,
Please review the fix for 8023477:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8023477/webrev.00/
Both tests reported by the bug failed due to the same problem. They both
are passing now.
The original memory reduction change for 8021948 turned out to be a
little trickier than I expected.
Th