Looks good! Thanks, /Staffan
> On 14 sep 2015, at 12:50, Alexander Kulyakhtin > <alexander.kulyakh...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Erik, > > Thank you very much for the review. > > Could someone from the Reviewers group, please, confirm the changes? > > Best regards, > Alexander > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: erik.gah...@oracle.com > To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net > Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 11:48:48 AM GMT +03:00 Iraq > Subject: Re: RFR 8134641: serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodelistTest.java > fails on sun.misc.Unsafe.getUnsafe > > Looks good, not a (R)eviewer. > > Erik > > Den 09/09/15 kl. 12:54, skrev Alexander Kulyakhtin: >> Hi, >> >> Could someone, please, review the small, test-only fix in the mail below? >> >> Best regards, >> Alexander >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: alexander.kulyakh...@oracle.com >> To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net >> Sent: Monday, September 7, 2015 7:56:45 PM GMT +03:00 Iraq >> Subject: Re: RFR 8134641: serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodelistTest.java >> fails on sun.misc.Unsafe.getUnsafe >> >> >> The fix has been updated to make sure that strings matching >> "sun.misc.Unsafe.getUnsafe", and not simply "getUnsafe" get filtered >> >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8134641_01/index.html >> >> Best regards, >> Alexander >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: alexander.kulyakh...@oracle.com >> To: serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net >> Sent: Monday, September 7, 2015 7:35:09 PM GMT +03:00 Iraq >> Subject: RFR 8134641: serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodelistTest.java fails >> on sun.misc.Unsafe.getUnsafe >> >> Could you, please, review the following small test-only change: >> >> Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134641 >> "serviceability/dcmd/compiler/CodelistTest.java fails with "Test failed on: >> sun.misc.Unsafe.getUnsafe()Lsun/misc/Unsafe;" >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akulyakh/8134641/index.html >> >> The test calls Jcmd (diagnostic command tool) Compiler.codelist and then >> parses the output, making sure that the first methods in the list is valid >> by reflection. >> >> However Unsafe.getUnsafe() method is hidden from reflection. >> Before the fix the test did not take that into account and failed whenever >> Unsafe.getUnsafe happened to be among the methods to be validated. >> >> The test has been changed to skip Unsafe.getUnsafe() method if present in >> the test input. >> >> Best regards, >> Alexander >> >> >> >
