Ok. Reviewed.

/Staffan

> On 16 aug. 2016, at 08:15, Harsha Wardhana B <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Yes. assertEQorGTE can be used. But using assertEQorLTE is better suited as 
> it increase code readability. So I would like to leave that in place.
> 
> 
> On Saturday 13 August 2016 12:59 AM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>> If you swap currUsage and peakUsage in the call to assertEQorLTE() you can 
>> use assertEQorGTE() and you won’t have to change CodeCacheUtils.java. Or am 
>> I missing something?
>> 
>>> On 12 aug. 2016, at 17:26, Harsha Wardhana B <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Please review modified webrev incorporating Staffan's comments.
>>> 
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8151345/webrev.01/
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> Harsha
>>> 
>>> On Friday 12 August 2016 01:59 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>>>> Harsha,
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for the explanation! With that in mind the new code looks correct, 
>>>> although I would probably make it even more obvious in which order 
>>>> getUsage() and getPeakUsage() is executed by calling them on separate 
>>>> lines before the call to assertEQorLTE() instead of relying on the order 
>>>> method parameters are evaluated. Relying on the order of evaluation is 
>>>> correct, but doing explicit calls would make it a lot more obvious that 
>>>> the order is important.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> /Staffan
>>>> 
>>>>> On 12 aug. 2016, at 10:07, Harsha Wardhana B 
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I forgot to put-in the fix details.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The test was failing because of a race condition caused by the order in 
>>>>> which MemoryPoolMXBean.getUsage and MemoryPoolMXBean.getPeakUsage was 
>>>>> invoked. It is possible that intermediate allocations can happen which 
>>>>> can lead to getUsage > getPeakUsage if getUsage is called after 
>>>>> getPeakUsage. The correct order would be to capture getUsage and then 
>>>>> capture getPeakUsage in order to account for intermediate allocations.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> 
>>>>> Harsha
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thursday 11 August 2016 12:02 PM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Could one of you please review the below fix?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Harsha
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Monday 08 August 2016 07:49 PM, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
>>>>>>> Please use following alias for compiler tests (hotspot/test/compiler):
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Leonid
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 08.08.2016 17:09, Harsha wardhana B wrote:
>>>>>>>> Gentle Reminder !!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 8/4/2016 9:49 PM, Harsha Wardhana B wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hello All,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Please review the below simple test fix for the issue,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151345
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> with webrev located at,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hb/8151345/webrev.00/
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Harsha
>>>>>>>>> 
> 

Reply via email to