RFR (S) 8215724: Epsilon: ArrayStoreExceptionTest.java fails; missing arraycopy check

[Aleksey Shipilev]

On 1/10/19 4:14 PM, jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com wrote:
>>>> Ugh. I haven't noticed the bug has "Fix Version: 12", and I pushed the fix to jdk/jdk. Which created
>>>> the "backport to 13". What should I do at this point? Should I also push the fix to jdk/jdk12 now?
>>>> Would that cause duplicate bug ids when jdk/jdk12 -> jdk/jdk merge happens?
>>>
>>> I believe that when you checked in 8215724 on 13, the system thought you fixed 12. In the process it
>>> created a "backport" bug (8216425) to 13 (actually forward merge, bad naming), when the bug was
>>> created it could see that it was already fixed in 13, and the 8216425 was directly resolved.
>>>
>>> I hope my description is kind of right. I guess that if you apply the fix to 12, 8215724 will be
>>> resolved as well. I will CC this mail to Jesper so that he will not be surprised when doing the
>>> merge of bug fixes to 13.
>>
>> AFAIU, if I push the same thing to jdk/jdk12, then jdk/jdk would end up with two changesets that
>> mention 8215724, which is what we are trying to avoid. I know jcheck has the exception list that
>> allows duplicate bug ids, but I'd desist from duplicating bugids deliberately. Maybe waiting for
>> jdk-updates/jdk12u to appear and do the normal backport is better all around, and it is not as
>> painful with the faster release cadence.
>>
>> I think gatekeepers should decide what to do. Jesper?
> 
> Duplicate changes with the same bug id is no longer an issue. You can (and should) safely push the
> fix to 12 as well.

Good to know! Let me test and push the fix to jdk/jdk12 too then.

-Aleksey

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20190110/5a0d1c50/signature.asc>