RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
Tue Aug 20 13:27:09 UTC 2019
This looks great. Thank you for making the changes.
One tiny thing that I don't want to see another webrev for. Can you change:
+/*
+ * Frees all memory allocated on the heap for the
+ * supplied array of arrays of chars (a), where n
+ * is the number of elements in the array.
+ */
to
+//
+// Frees all memory allocated on the heap for the
+// supplied array of arrays of chars (a), where n
+// is the number of elements in the array.
+//
And the big comment to have // at the top of split_path?
We prefer // comments in the code. Do you need a sponsor?
Thanks,
Coleen
On 8/20/19 9:13 AM, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Good advice. Changes made as requested.
>
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~afarley/8227021.6/webrev/
>
> Does anyone have further concerns or changes to propose?
>
> Best Regards
>
> Adam Farley
> IBM Runtimes
>
>
> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote on 20/08/2019 12:55:26:
>
> > From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
> > Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> > Date: 20/08/2019 12:55
> > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path
> > paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> >
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > On 20/08/2019 1:21 am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > > Hi Coleen, David,
> > >
> > > Here's the new webrev: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.5_webrev_&d=DwID-
> > g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> >
> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=zaU5bibnUdHVncMttyVGbYf1yzDRUt26f9raqqKlJm0&s=QPe5l0tueNKISo62mJJ2RdRLUg_LsrhapCgVNJ0W3yQ&e=
> >
> > In this comment:
> >
> > ! * in use, you can pass the length of that in n, to ensure
> > ! * we detect if any path exceeds the maximum path length
> > ! * once prepended onto the sub-path/file name.
> > * It is the callers responsibility to:
> > * a> check the value of n, and n may be 0.
> >
> > the three references to 'n' should be to the new file_name_length
> parameter.
> >
> > Looking at the test:
> >
> > 2 * Copyright (c) 2019, 2019, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All
> > rights reserved.
> >
> > For a new file there is only a single year specified so this should be:
> >
> > 2 * Copyright (c) 2019, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights
> > reserved.
> >
> > 31 * @run main TestSunBootLibraryPath
> >
> > As this just launches another VM it is more efficient to use "@run
> driver".
> >
> > 35 import java.lang.IllegalArgumentException;
> >
> > Nit: java.lang.* is implicitly imported.
> >
> > 39 static String expectedErrorMessage =("The VM tried to use a
> > path that exceeds the maximum path length for "
> > 40 + "this system. Review
> > path-containing parameters and properties, such as "
> > 41 + "sun.boot.library.path, to
> > identify potential sources for this path.");
> >
> > Nit: no need for parentheses.
> >
> > Probably also no need to check for the entire message - the first line
> > should suffice.
> >
> > 48 //Add enough characters to make it "too long".
> > 49 for (int i = 0 ; i < tooLongPathSize ; i++)
> tooLongPath
> > += "a";
> >
> > This can be done more efficiently and succinctly as:
> >
> > tooLongPath += "a".repeat(5000);
> >
> > There's probably an even better way. :)
> >
> > 60 throw new java.lang.IllegalArgumentException("Test was
> > launched with an invalid argument.");
> >
> > No need to specify "java.lang".
> >
> > Thanks,
> > David
> > -----
> >
> > > I made the requested changes, and moved the null check as suggested.
> > >
> > > (I agree passing a null for any of these values would be odd, and
> > > unlikely to be done on purpose.)
> > >
> > > It also includes a new jtreg test for this change, which uses
> ProcessTools.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you think (inc Serguei + others).
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > >
> > > Adam Farley
> > > IBM Runtimes
> > >
> > >
> > > coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote on 16/08/2019 23:59:53:
> > >
> > >> From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
> > >> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
> > >> Cc: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>,
> hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> > >> Date: 17/08/2019 00:00
> > >> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any sun.boot.library.path
> > >> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >> On 8/16/19 7:35 AM, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> Hi Coleen,
> > >>
> > >> To confirm your suspicions, I didn't see your responses. No
> > offence intended.
> > >>
> > >> I send a lot of mail so I'm sure I can be caught in people's
> spamfilter. :)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Responses below.
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards
> > >>
> > >> Adam Farley
> > >> IBM Runtimes
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote on 15/08/2019 13:42:51:
> > >>
> > >> > From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com
> > >> > To: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net, Adam Farley8
> > >> > <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > >> > Date: 15/08/2019 13:43
> > >> > Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any
> sun.boot.library.path
> > >> > paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi Adam, David noticed that my code review replies only went
> to the
> > >> > mailing list. So here it is again.
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > Coleen
> > >> >
> > >> > On 8/13/19 5:29 PM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 8/13/19 11:48 AM, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> > >> Hi David,
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Since we have two positive reviews (yours and Serguei's),
> could you
> > >> > >> sponsor the change please?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > If you get two positive reviews, but then one with comments,
> you need
> > >> > > to also answer that third reviews. I had some comments on your
> > >> > > change, which I'll repeat here:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> 2_webrev_src_hotspot_share_runtime_os.cpp.frames.html&d=DwIDaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> > >> > siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> > >> > CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=wjd3KxxgFQv49yjlb4Bndy-
> > >> >
> F1XV4pbuPZrmemiaFthA&s=xXwflqvuzoEhcREhr-x7rNMVDeroZ8Xh1LnW6NytumE&e=
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This is code is unnecessarily hard to read and understand:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 1329 char** os::split_path(const char* path, size_t* n) {
> > >> > > 1330 size_t pathmod = (size_t)0;
> > >> > > 1331 if (n != NULL) {
> > >> > > 1332 pathmod = *n;
> > >> > > 1333 }
> > >> > > 1334 *n = (size_t)0;
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It appears that 'n' is both an input and output parameter of
> this
> > >> > > function. Can you just make it another input parameter with
> some
> > >> > > descriptive name. Is it the length of the library name that
> you're
> > >> > > looking for? "pathmod" is huh?
> > >>
> > >> The 'n' is both an input and an output, yes.
> > >>
> > >> I could make it another input parameter, but that means modifying
> the
> > >> method signature. This seemed unnecessary, given that we have an
> input
> > >> vector we're not using for anything.
> > >>
> > >> It's not a big deal to add a parameter, especially since there's
> > >> only one call site, and the names don't have to be squished up C
> names.
> > >>
> > >> How about: char** split_path(char* path, size_t file_length,
> > >> size_t* elements) ?
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The 'n' input is used as a modifier for the length of the path, as
> > >> mentioned in the comment. I called it "pathmod" because it's a PATH
> > >> length MODIFIER. I couldn't think of a better name that's also
> concise.
> > >> Would pathlenmod be better? Pathsizemod sounds like we're making
> the path
> > >> physically bigger, or maybe that's just me. :)
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Then you don't have to check if someone has passed NULL.
> There's only
> > >> > > one caller to this from what I see.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure I understand this. We'd still need to check for
> null, even if
> > >> the pathmod has its own input parameter. I believe adding a NULL
> to an int
> > >> causes a segmentation error at runtime.
> > >>
> > >> If you're saying the null check isn't needed because we can
> > ensure anon-null
> > >> is passed in via the only place we call split_path, I disagree
> > that this is a
> > >> future-proof assumption. A null check seems prudent here.
> > >>
> > >> I think the function doesn't make any sense if you pass an output
> > >> parameter as NULL. Or at worst you could add it to the line:
> > >>
> > >> 1335 if (path == NULL || strlen(path) == 0 || n == NULL) {
> > >> 1336 return NULL;
> > >> 1337 }
> > >> 1334 *n = (size_t)0;
> > >>
> > >> But that's just weird. Why would a caller pass a non-null path and
> > >> not want the element count?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Coleen
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 1352 char** opath = (char**) NEW_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char*, count,
> > >> > > mtInternal);
> > >> > > 1353 if (opath == NULL) {
> > >> > > 1354 return NULL;
> > >> > > 1355 }
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Not your change but this calls vm_exit_out_of_memory() if
> > >> > > NEW_C_HEAP_ARRAY fails. It doesn't return NULL so you don't
> have to
> > >> > > check.
> > >>
> > >> Seems legit. I'll include this in the .5 version once we have
> consensus on
> > >> the other changes. Good spot.
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 1375 char* s = (char*)NEW_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char, len + 1,
> > mtInternal);
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Here you want to use NEW_C_HEAP_ARRAY_RETURN_NULL so you
> cancheck for
> > >> > > null and free memory.
> > >>
> > >> Good idea. Noted for .5.
> > >>
> > >> Let me know your thoughts on the other points above.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The rest seems okay.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > thanks,
> > >> > > Coleen
> > >> > >
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Best Regards
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Adam Farley
> > >> > >> IBM Runtimes
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote on 12/08/2019
> 23:32:14:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
> > >> > >>> Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net, "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"
> > >> > >>> <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>> Date: 12/08/2019 23:32
> > >> > >>> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any
> sun.boot.library.path
> > >> > >>> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Looks fine.
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Thanks,
> > >> > >>> David
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> On 13/08/2019 1:19 am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> > >>>> Hi David,
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Changes made as requested:
> > >> > >>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > >>>
> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.4_webrev&d=DwID-
> > >> > >>> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=mZM8IR4e_zmrfcsF3XJjoGEMrZb4WtEL7Y6Ugd6Naqg&s=sZ2UKqqUIq0El-
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>> RsqYz6jmTh4Q2UghwdrQX6of8Lw0E&e=
> > >> > >>>> Best Regards
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> Adam Farley
> > >> > >>>> IBM Runtimes
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote on 12/08/
> > 2019 04:55:36:
> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >>>>> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>>>> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>,
> > >> > >>>>> "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>>>> Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> > >> > >>>>> Date: 12/08/2019 04:56
> > >> > >>>>> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any
> > sun.boot.library.path
> > >> > >>>>> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Hi Adam,
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> On 10/08/2019 2:47 am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>> Hi Serguei, David,
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> My turn to apologise for the delay. :)
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> I've modified the code as per Serguei's request. Take
> alook and
> > >> > >> let me
> > >> > >>>>>> know if this is the sort of thing you were thinking of.
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Webrev: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > >>>>>
> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.3_webrev_&d=DwID-
> > >> > >>>>> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> > >> > >>>>> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=L19aeFXoR9JIO62QRPFzZObIU8RbhpCtXSvUibD2ISk&e=
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>>> I'd prefer to see the helper just as a file static
> function rather
> > >> > >> than
> > >> > >>>>> adding it to the os class.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> + * supplied array of arrays of chars (a), where n
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> I assume (a) is meant to refer to the parameter, but you
> actually
> > >> > >> called
> > >> > >>>>> it arrayarray. I think "a" or "arr" would suffice.
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >> > >>>>> David
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Best Regards
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> Adam Farley
> > >> > >>>>>> IBM Runtimes
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>> "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"
> > <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com> wrote on
> > >> > >>>>>> 31/07/2019 17:18:05:
> > >> > >>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> From: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com"
> <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>>>>>> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>, David Holmes
> > >> > >>>>>>> <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Cc: serviceability-dev
> <serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net>,
> > >> > >>>>>>> hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
> > >> > >>>>>>> Date: 31/07/2019 17:18
> > >> > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any
> > >> > >> sun.boot.library.path
> > >> > >>>>>>> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Hi Adam,
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> It looks Okay to me.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> A couple of minor comments.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > >>>>> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.
> > >> > >>>>> 2_webrev_src_hotspot_&d=DwID-g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-
> > >> > >>>>>
> siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=NL6tYuwwDod3DSmj-1ztxAywpO8L52HEyO0wvTR05bs&e=
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>>>>> share/runtime/os.cpp.frames.html
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1362 //release allocated storage before exiting the vm
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1363 while (i > 0) {
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1364 i--;
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1365 if (opath[i] != NULL) {
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1366 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char, opath[i]);
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1367 }
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1368 }
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1369 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char*, opath);
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1377 //release allocated storage before returning null
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1378 while (i > 0) {
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1379 i--;
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1380 if (opath[i] != NULL) {
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1381 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char, opath[i]);
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1382 }
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1383 }
> > >> > >>>>>>> 1384 FREE_C_HEAP_ARRAY(char*, opath);
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> This duplicated fragments is worth to refactor to a
> function.
> > >> > >>>>>>> Also a space is missed at the beginning of the comment.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> > >>>>>>> Serguei
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> On 7/31/19 02:01, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>> Hi All,
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Reviewers requested for the change below.
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> @David - Agreed. Would you be prepared to sponsor the
> change?
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Bug: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > >>>>>
> u=https-3A__bugs.openjdk.java.net_browse_JDK-2D8227021&d=DwID-
> > >> > >>>>> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> > >> > >>>>> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=xykJ0KLy9AKWO8zmC0amfR7xxUsvyKEjlf3y7WWOqvE&e=
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Webrev: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?
> > >> > >>>>>
> u=http-3A__cr.openjdk.java.net_-7Eafarley_8227021.2_webrev_&d=DwID-
> > >> > >>>>> g&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=P5m8KWUXJf-
> > >> > >>>>> CeVJc0hDGD9AQ2LkcXDC0PMV9ntVw5Ho&m=8Wa8Zdfmvn-
> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> yvzvCAhOyJ_etFblRA4vmLGbKF4aW8PY&s=NvIza4VVWG3CiDhmQVmXsghH_4h_c5mFJbHwkCUcut0&e=
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Best Regards
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Adam Farley
> > >> > >>>>>>> IBM Runtimes
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> P.S. Remembered to add the links this time. :)
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com> wrote on 30/07/2019
> > >> > >> 03:37:53:
> > >> > >>>>>>>> From: David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> To: Adam Farley8 <adam.farley at uk.ibm.com>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Cc: hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net, serviceability-dev
> > >> > >>>>>>>> <serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Date: 30/07/2019 03:38
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8227021: VM fails if any
> > >> > >> sun.boot.library.path
> > >> > >>>>>>>> paths are longer than JVM_MAXPATHLEN
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Hi Adam,
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> On 25/07/2019 3:57 am, Adam Farley8 wrote:
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> Hi David,
> > >> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>>> Welcome back. :)
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Thanks. Sorry for the delay in getting back to this.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> I like .v2 as it is much simpler (notwithstanding freeing
> > >> > >>> the already
> > >> > >>>>>>>> allocated arrays adds some complexity - thanks for
> > fixing that).
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> I'm still not sure we can't optimise things better for
> > >> > >> unchangeable
> > >> > >>>>>>>> properties like the boot libary path, but that's
> another RFE.
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> > >> > >>>>>>>> David
> > >> > >>>>>>>>
> > >> > >>>>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
> > >> > >>>>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and
> > Wales with
> > >> > >>>>>>> number 741598.
> > >> > >>>>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> > >> > >>> Hampshire PO6 3AU
> > >> > >>>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
> > >> > >>>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and
> > Wales with
> > >> > >> number
> > >> > >>>>>> 741598.
> > >> > >>>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> > >> > >>> Hampshire PO6 3AU
> > >> > >>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
> > >> > >>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and
> Wales with
> > >> > >> number
> > >> > >>>> 741598.
> > >> > >>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> > Hampshire PO6
> > >> > >> 3AU
> > >> > >> Unless stated otherwise above:
> > >> > >> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and
> > Wales with number
> > >> > >> 741598.
> > >> > >> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> Hampshire
> > >> > >> PO6 3AU
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Unless stated otherwise above:
> > >> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> > >> number 741598.
> > >> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth,
> Hampshire PO6 3AU
> > > Unless stated otherwise above:
> > > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> number
> > > 741598.
> > > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
> PO6 3AU
> >
>
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> number 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
More information about the hotspot-dev
mailing list