RFR 8171988: backout of 8062389, 8029459, 8061950

[Peter Levart]

Hi,

Just returned from a trip...

So. No, there's no problem pushing this. But I can also just fix the 
real problem. If you give me a couple of minutes, I think I can diagnose 
what's going on...

Regards, Peter


On 12/26/2016 06:30 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> On 26 Dec 2016, at 16:26, joe darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Assuming we'll want to revisit this work at some point, there are some advantages to anti-delta-ing the code changes now, but just problem listing the tests in terms of making a less confusing history.
> My preference is to anti-delta. There are just too many tests failing, ~35 across all platforms and tiers.
>
> Peter,
>    Let me know if you need any help pushing this.
>
> -Chris.
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>> On 12/26/2016 1:58 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>>>> On 26 Dec 2016, at 09:35, Peter Levart <peter.levart at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>
>>>> I've been told that the latest change I pushed causes some tests to fail, so I prepared a backout patch for 8062389, 8029459, 8061950:
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/Class.getMethods.new/backout.09/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/Class.getMethods.new/backout.09/webrev.01/>
>>> I just grabbed the webrev patch, applied it to a local repo, then
>>> compared that against a repo that had been updated to the
>>> change prior to your push. They are identical, so this appears
>>> to be an accurate anti-delta.
>>>
>>> Maybe file a new bug, or just make it clear in the synopsis of
>>> 8171988 that it is an anti-delta.
>>>
>>>
>>>>  From the stacktrace of the bug report, it seems an early initialization issue with VarHandle(s) involved. Can you shed some light into what tests are failing?
>>> I’ll post a few comments in 8171988 with sample failures.
>>>
>>> -Chris.
>>>
>>>> But first let us backout that change.
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Peter
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/26/2016 10:09 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
>>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm taking a look at this...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Peter
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/26/2016 06:14 AM, Jeff Dinkins wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Peter -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just received mail from out SQE manager, saying that your last changeset has caused our test harness to hiccup.  I don’t have much more detail besides the below bug, but I’m wondering if you could do us a huge favor and roll your change back for now while it’s debugged (and so we can get our automated tests going again).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171988 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171988>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -jeff
>>>>>>