Thank you a lot, Jaroslav!
Serguei
On 4/29/15 3:02 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
The fix looks ok as far as the change goes.
I'm relying on your analysis for the correctness.
-JB-
On 29.4.2015 11:48, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Ping...
Just wanted to tell that it is a very safe and simple one-liner so that
I assumed it to be reviewed in a couple of days, not weeks! :)
Thanks!
Serguei
On 4/27/15 2:12 PM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Please, review the jdk 9 fix for:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076579
9 hotspot webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2015/hotspot/8076579-JVMTI-pop.1
Summary:
This bug is a regression that was introduced but the fix of:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7187554
The bug is in the InterpreterRuntime::member_name_arg_or_null()
function that
does not return NULL if there is no invokestatic appendix argument
(MemberName).
It is why the _remove_activation_preserving_args is trying to to
restore unexisting
appendix argument when a pop instruction is executed by a debugger
in the debuggee VM.
The fix is to correctly set NULL in the thread vm_result when it is
necessary:
thread->set_vm_result(NULL);
Testing in progress:
In progress: nsk.jvmti.testlist and nsk.jdi.testlist PopFrame tests,
JTREG com/sun/jdi tests,
ad-hog ExceptionBug.java test from the bug report
Thanks,
Serguei
