RFR 8171971: Fix timing bug in JVM management of package export lists

[David Holmes]

On 19/01/2017 10:45 PM, harold seigel wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> So if a file, such as modules.cpp, was added to the JVM for JDK-9, but
> written in 2016, then its copyright should be "2016, 2017," even though
> the file hasn't yet been part of an actual release?

Yes. The file's relation to a binary release is not relevant.

Thanks,
David

> Thanks, Harold
>
>
> On 1/18/2017 8:04 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>> Hi Harold,
>>
>> Not a review but noticed the copyright updates are not correct -
>> should now be "2016, 2017," for most of the files not just "2017,"
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>
>> On 19/01/2017 1:05 AM, harold seigel wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Please review this fix for the package export timing holes discussed in
>>> JDK-8171971.  The fix reduces the number of PackageEntry fields that are
>>> used to maintain a package's export state and uses the Module_lock to
>>> protect all access to these fields.
>>>
>>> Also, in cases where a package transitions from having qualified exports
>>> to being unqualifiedly exported, it fixes the cleanup of its qualified
>>> export list by removing the _exported_pending_delete field and using
>>> just is_unqual_exported() to determine when the qualified exports list
>>> can be purged (at a safepoint).
>>>
>>> Open Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hseigel/bug_8171971/webrev/
>>>
>>> JBS Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171971
>>>
>>> The fix was tested with the hotspot, java/lang, java/util, java/io, JFR,
>>> and other JTReg tests, the JCK lang and VM tests, RBT tier2 - tier5
>>> tests on LinuxX64, and the colocated and non-colocated NSK tests.
>>>
>>> Thanks, Harold
>>>
>