[aarch64-port-dev ] 8153107: Unbalanced recursive locking

[Andrey Petushkov]

Ah, I see. Looks like Bell-sw is the only company besides Oracle which
works with arm(32) port (at least in the open) so it make sense for them to
make their testing

Thanks for letting me know

Regards,
Andrey

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:31 PM Daniel D. Daugherty <
daniel.daugherty at oracle.com> wrote:

> Thanks Derek and Andrey!
>
> aleksei.voitylov at bell-sw.com sent me mail letting me know that
> boris.ulasevich at bell-sw.com is doing some testing on the change
> on ARM32 and will let me know the results tomorrow.
>
> Dan
>
>
> On 6/18/18 4:04 PM, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>
> Sure,  me too
>
> Thank you,
> Andrey
>
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 22:53 White, Derek <Derek.White at cavium.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, It's a go for me on aarch64.
>>
>>  - Derek
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: aarch64-port-dev [mailto:aarch64-port-dev-
>> > bounces at openjdk.java.net] On Behalf Of Daniel D. Daugherty
>> > Sent: Monday, June 18, 2018 2:34 PM
>> > To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com>; Andrey Petushkov
>> > <andrey.petushkov at gmail.com>
>> > Cc: aarch64-port-dev at openjdk.java.net; hotspot-runtime-
>> > dev at openjdk.java.net; AArch32 Port Project <aarch32-port-
>> > dev at openjdk.java.net>
>> > Subject: Re: [aarch64-port-dev ] 8153107: Unbalanced recursive locking
>> >
>> > External Email
>> >
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > OK so I'm not going to get a "go" based on reproducible test results.
>> > I'm okay with that as long as I get a "go" from the other folks
>> reviewing and
>> > discussing this change:
>> >
>> > Andrew Haley     - go (as stated below)
>> > Andrey Petushkov -
>> > Dan Daugherty    - go (since Oracle platform testing passed)
>> > Derek White      -
>> >
>> > Of course, I could have listed Andrey as a go since he is the author of
>> the fix,
>> > but I didn't want to assume... :-)
>> >
>> > Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > On 6/18/18 12:07 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> > > On 06/18/2018 05:02 PM, Andrey Petushkov wrote:
>> > >> And as I said, I have a reproducer. It just happen that it only
>> > >> reproduces the problem on port-aarch32 implementation
>> > > Well, I'm sure that I can't reproduce the problem either, and I
>> > > believe that the bug does not exist on AArch64.  I'm happy for your
>> > > patch to be committed.
>> > >
>>
>>
>