[15u] MonitorInfo bugs: JDK-8249192 and JDK-8251118

[Harold Seigel]

Hi Aleksey,

The 15u backports for 8249192 and 8251118 were pushed (by me) to the 
wrong repo but will be included in the JDK 15.0.2 release.

Harold

On 11/30/2020 8:35 AM, Robert McKenna wrote:
> W.r.t. 8251118 - I don't see a record of a 15u push after you 
> requested fix approval.
>
>     -Rob
>
> On 30/11/2020 13:33, Robert McKenna wrote:
>> Thomas, I don't see any obvious reason why this was not pushed to the 
>> OpenJDK repo. Can you rectify this as soon as you get the chance.
>>
>> Aleksey, apologies for missing this, and thanks for the heads up. In 
>> future please include the responsible engineer for the bug in the 
>> mail (cc'ing the alias and me)
>>
>>     -Rob
>>
>> On 25/11/2020 08:34, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>> Rob,
>>>
>>> On 11/18/20 2:17 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/20 11:00 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>>> Hi again,
>>>>>
>>>>> I asked this question in the relevant RFR threads, but they 
>>>>> apparently went unnoticed. Therefore,
>>>>> let me ask this in a new thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is about the following issues:
>>>>>      8249192: MonitorInfo stores raw oops across safepoints
>>>>>      8251118: BiasedLocking::preserve_marks should not have a 
>>>>> HandleMar
>>>>>
>>>>> At the time 15.0.1 was open for pushes, it had been stated that 
>>>>> both issues were pushed to some CPU
>>>>> repo. I was under impression it was to appear in 15.0.1 release, 
>>>>> but it did not. So, there are no
>>>>> changes in current 15u:
>>>>> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk-updates/jdk15u/log?rev=8249192
>>>>> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk-updates/jdk15u/log?rev=8251118
>>>>>
>>>>> There is still the "Resolved" backport in 15.0.2 for one of the 
>>>>> issues:
>>>>>       https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251485
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and there is no resolved backport for another.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, is there a private 15.0.2 CPU repo within Oracle? Are we 
>>>>> expecting both issues to come with
>>>>> 15.0.2 CPU push? Even in this case, can we push the change to open 
>>>>> 15.0.2, so we would be able to
>>>>> test it in open repositories before next CPU hits?
>>>>
>>>> Friendly reminder.
>>>
>>> Another friendly reminder.
>>>
>>
>