Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector
Andrew Hughes
gnu.andrew at redhat.com
Fri Feb 19 18:38:01 UTC 2016
----- Original Message -----
> Hi,
>
> Please approve and sponsor the following fix for JDK-6425769 to 7u-dev.
I'm not sure what you mean by "sponsor". Do you mean you don't have commit
access and need someone else to push for you? I can do that if so.
> It's a one-to-one backport from the fix which went into JDK 8 and JDK
> 9. What needed changing is the test to account for JDK 7 and
> accompanying testlibrary. There were also two subsequent test fixes in
> JDK 8/9 for which I'd like to ask for backport approval as well.
>
> Main bug:
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk7.00/
> HG export:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk7-exports/
>
> The actual patch is the same as in 9 and 8. Only slight modifications
> to the test have been done to make it work with JDK 7.
This looks fine. I assume the tests ran fine on OpenJDK 7?
The one line I would change is:
(bindAddress == null ? "" : "\n\t" + PropertyNames.HOST + "=" + bindAddress)
I don't see a need for a check as the toString result of null is "null", but
no point changing it if it's already in 8 & 9.
Also, not sure why you need two URLs here? What is the difference between
webrev (the one I review) and 'HG export'?
>
>
> Test fixes for the test introduced with JDK-6425769:
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk7.00/
> HG export:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk7-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch
>
> It's the very same patch as in 8 and 9.
>
> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk7.00/
> HG export:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk7-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch
>
> It's the same patch as in 8 and 9. It only accounts for surrounding code
> changes.
>
> Please let me know if there are questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Severin
>
Looks ok to me.
--
Andrew :)
Senior Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
PGP Key: ed25519/35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
More information about the jdk7u-dev
mailing list