[11u]: 8262121: [11u] Redo 8244287: JFR: Methods samples have line number 0

[Langer, Christoph]

Hi Goetz,

Thanks for tackling this now!

The original change, JDK-8244287, did only apply to 11u, so it was done in 11.0.9. As it was pushed to 11u at the time, consolidation into jdk11u-dev created "backport" JDK-8253576 to 11.0.10. The same goes for the backout, JDK-8253813. It has JDK-8253888 as backport.

Your change looks good to me. As it is a net new change in 11u, you should probably update the copyright years in jfrStackTrace.hpp and .cpp.

Since the tests show no regressions this time, I would be good if you still push it to 11.0.11. Rampdown hasn't started yet and the change isn't unclear or large at all. But I leave it to you.

Please don't modify the versions of the existing bugs. The linked items of JDK-8244287 contain all the history.

Best regards
Christoph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net> On
> Behalf Of Lindenmaier, Goetz
> Sent: Montag, 22. Februar 2021 14:11
> To: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: [11u]: 8262121: [11u] Redo 8244287: JFR: Methods samples have line
> number 0
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We tried to backport "8244287: JFR: Methods samples have line number 0"
> to 11.0.9 [1].  The first downport had to be backed out, though [2].
> 
> I now propose this change for the issue. Please review.
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~goetz/wr21/8262121-Redo-8244287-
> JFR_line_no_0-jdk11/01/
> I have verified that we do not see the crashes we saw with the
> original change.
> 
> New Issue:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8262121
> 
> Original Change:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8244287
> Previous downport:
>  https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8253576
> Backout:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8253813
> 
> I don't understand why the previous backport is
> flagged as 11.010. It was pushed on 2020-09-23,
> which was in the 11.0.9 time frame. But we had
> issues with the automatic tagging in the past, probably
> this is the reason.
> 
> I will only push this to 11.0.12.
> I would also adapt the backport information so that
> JBS shows that this is only fixed in 11.0.12.
> 
> Best regards,
>   Goetz
> 
> [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2020-
> June/003312.html
> [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2020-
> September/003886.html