RFR(XS) 8076311: Java 9 process negative MaxTenuringThreshold in different way than Java 8

[Dmitry Dmitriev]

Jon, thank you for review and sponsorship!

In review request I mention that I don't OpenJDK Author, but at Friday I 
got OpenJDK Author for JDK 9, so I will sent you a final patch with my 
commit.

Thanks,
Dmitry

On 04.04.2015 0:53, Jon Masamitsu wrote:
> Dmitry,
>
> Change looks good.
>
> Reviewed.
>
> I can sponsor the push.  Send the final patch once you have all
> your reviews.
>
> Jon
>
>
> On 4/3/2015 2:49 AM, Dmitry Dmitriev wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Please review this small fix for JDK-8076311. Also, I need a sponsor 
>> for this fix, who can push it, because I'm not have a OpenJDK name.
>>
>> Fix for JDK-6521376 add explicit processing of MaxTenuringThreshold 
>> XX option. When bad value for MaxTenuringThreshold is passed(e.g. 
>> negative value for unsigned option "-XX:MaxTenuringThreshold=-1"), 
>> then function print warning and continue execution with default 
>> value(0). This behavior differs from Java 8. Java 8 process this 
>> situation in common way for unsigned options, i.e. print waring and 
>> reports a error. So, I fix Java 9 MaxTenuringThreshold option 
>> processing.
>>
>> Also, I add new test case to the 
>> test/gc/arguments/TestInitialTenuringThreshold.java to test this 
>> situation.
>>
>> Open webrev: 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ctornqvi/webrev/8076311/webrev.00/ 
>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ectornqvi/webrev/8076311/webrev.00/>
>>
>> JBS bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076311
>>
>> Tested: JPRT
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Dmitry
>