[hs] RFR (L): 8010319: Implementation of JEP 181: Nest-Based Access Control

[David Holmes]

Hi Aleksey,

The problem will likely be:

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/2ace90aec488

Though there's no platform specific code there so it may be that it 
tickles some other bug.

David

On 23/05/2018 5:27 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> On 05/23/2018 04:31 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>> On 23/05/2018 8:50 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>> On 05/22/2018 11:44 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>> On 23/05/2018 2:35 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>>> On 05/22/2018 06:01 PM, Andrew Dinn wrote:
>>>>>>>        aarch64: FAILED
>>>>>>>           java/lang/invoke/SpecialInterfaceCall.java
>>>>>>>              http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/nestmates/SpecialInterfaceCall-hs_err.log
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have not dug deeper yet, AArch64 maintainers are welcome to step in!
>>>>>> I'm not sure what is going on here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A few days ago I patched the jdk/jdk dev tree with David's megapatch,
>>>>>> built on AArch64 and ran tier1 tests, obtaining results before and after
>>>>>> patching. There were some tier1 test failures which did not seem to
>>>>>> relate to the NestMates patch. All three of CondyReturnPrimitiveTest,
>>>>>> CondyWrongType and SpecialInterfaceCall passed before and after.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will check to see the patch has been applied correctly and rerun these
>>>>>> tests. Aleksey, perhaps you could try again using a patched jdkdev?
>>>>>
>>>>> Applied David's webrev.hotspot.v1 over current jdk/jdk, and SpecialInterfaceCall fails the same way
>>>>> with linux-aarch64-fastdebug on my Raspberry Pi 3.
>>>>
>>>> You can't just apply the hotspot patch! You need the entire thing.
>>>
>>> Duh, right. In this case, we were "saved" by the fact the failing test seems to explore hotspot side
>>> of things only, and it fails the same way the nestmates branch in valhalla repo. And anyhow,
>>> applying the full patch fails the same way :)
>>
>> SpecialInterfaceCall shouldn't be failing! Can you confirm it only fails with nestmates patches
>> applied? (It's not a nestmate test and should** be unaffected by nestmate changes.)
> 
> It seems to be a pre-existing issue, indeed. So, nestmates does not necessarily makes it worse. Let'
> me bisect. Nestmates looks good-ish then :)
> 
> -Aleksey
>