Hi, Doesn't this have to be posted to jdk8u-dev?
I had a look at the backport. Including 7127191 confused me a bit. Is it good to hide the fact that this was backported in the repository? In os_linux one fix is missing, is this on purpose? I don't think this is a critical issue, though, so leaving it out is fine. > the dropping of the changes to ... > src/share/vm/runtime/task.cpp and > src/os/windows/vm/attachListener_windows.cpp These changes are included in the webrev ...? The webrev looks good to me. Best regards, Goetz. > -----Original Message----- > From: hotspot-dev <hotspot-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of > Andrew Hughes > Sent: Mittwoch, 21. November 2018 07:45 > To: serviceability-dev <serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net>; hotspot-dev > <hotspot-...@openjdk.java.net> > Subject: [8u] [RFR] 8140482: Various minor code improvements (runtime) > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140482 > Original changeset: > https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk-updates/jdk9u/hotspot/rev/cd86b5699825 > Webrev: > https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8140482/webrev.01/ > > The patch largely applies as is, with some adjustment for context and > the dropping of the changes to src/cpu/x86/vm/stubRoutines_x86.cpp, > src/share/vm/runtime/task.cpp and > src/os/windows/vm/attachListener_windows.cpp > which don't exist in 8u. A clean backport of 7127191 is included, which > allows the changes to agent/src/os/linux/libproc_impl.c to apply as-is. > > Applying the change to 8u improves the code quality there and aids > in backporting other changes, such as 8210836 [0]. > > Ok for 8u? > > [0] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2018- > November/025991.html > > Thanks, > -- > Andrew :) > > Senior Free Java Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > Web Site: http://fuseyism.com > Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java > PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) > Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
