[aarch64-port-dev ] RFR: 8193266: AArch64: TestOptionsWithRanges.java SIGSEGV

[Stuart Monteith]

Thanks Coleen,
  So once somebody here manages to review it, I can commit the patch.
I might have this backwards, but should the patch target jdk/jdk or
jdk/jdk10?

Thanks again,
     Stuart


On 11 January 2018 at 12:29,  <coleen.phillimore at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> This looks good to me.   I will sponsor this fix, once we confirm the
> reviewers and you commit the patch and rerun the webrev (so it's in
> jdk10.patch).   I see this is for jdk10.
>
> thanks,
> Coleen
>
>
> On 1/5/18 1:43 PM, Stuart Monteith wrote:
>>
>> I've removed the AARCH64 conditionals, added the empty line I removed,
>> and changed the type of "use_XOR_for_compressed_class_base" to bool.
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~smonteith/8193266/webrev-5/
>>
>> BR,
>>     Stuart
>>
>>
>> On 4 January 2018 at 14:45, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 04/01/18 14:26, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>   I was going to offer to sponsor this since it touches shared code but
>>>> I'm not sure I like that there's AARCH64 specific code in
>>>> universe.cpp/hpp.   And the name is somewhat offputting, suggesting
>>>> implementation details of one target leaking into shared code.
>>>>
>>>> set_use_XOR_for_compressed_class_base
>>>>
>>>> I think webrev-3 looked more reasonable, and could elide the #ifdef
>>>> AARCH64 in the shared code for that version.   And the indentation is
>>>> better.
>>>
>>> I hate the #ifdef AARCH64 stuff too, but it's always a sign that there
>>> is something wrong with the front-end to back-end modularization.  We
>>> can handle the use_XOR_for_compressed_class_base later: we really
>>> should have a way to communicate with the back ends when the memory
>>> layout is initialized.  We can go with webrev-3.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Andrew Haley
>>> Java Platform Lead Engineer
>>> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
>>> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
>
>