From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 11:39:01 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 17:09:01 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068431: @since and @jdk.Exported are missing in jdk.nashorn.api.scripting classes and package-info.java files Message-ID: <54AA77D5.4010201@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068431 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004075.html jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068431/8u40/ backported "as is" except for modular source layour difference. Thanks -Sundar From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 11:46:27 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:46:27 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068431: @since and @jdk.Exported are missing in jdk.nashorn.api.scripting classes and package-info.java files In-Reply-To: <54AA77D5.4010201@oracle.com> References: <54AA77D5.4010201@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AA7993.8000502@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 05/01/15 11:39, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068431 > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004075.html > jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068431/8u40/ > > backported "as is" except for modular source layour difference. > > Thanks > -Sundar From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 16:30:36 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 22:00:36 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068279: (typo in the spec) javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getLanguageName Message-ID: <54AABC2C.40007@oracle.com> Please approve. bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068279 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030582.html jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068279/8u60/ Backported 'as is' except for modular source layout difference. Thanks -Sundar From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 16:39:53 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 16:39:53 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068279: (typo in the spec) javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getLanguageName In-Reply-To: <54AABC2C.40007@oracle.com> References: <54AABC2C.40007@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AABE59.2040301@oracle.com> Please add a suitable noreg keyword. Approved. -Rob On 05/01/15 16:30, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068279 > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030582.html > jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068279/8u60/ > > Backported 'as is' except for modular source layout difference. > > Thanks > -Sundar From lana.steuck at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 21:17:35 2015 From: lana.steuck at oracle.com (lana.steuck at oracle.com) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 13:17:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: jdk8u-b01: jdk8u-dev Message-ID: <201501052117.t05LHZSq001952@jano-app.us.oracle.com> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/rev/c98ebe8e91ac http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/nashorn/rev/59e4cf23697e http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/langtools/rev/7845808098ea http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/c06b6d58e6a9 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxws/rev/dd25f8e8c6ab http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxp/rev/8beb27f2f1bb http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/7b46afd373e1 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/corba/rev/0ea69ff98c84 --- All the fixes will be tested during promotion (no PIT testing at this point): List of all public fixes: ========================== JDK-7155963 client-libs Deadlock in SystemFlavorMap.getFlavorsForNative and SunToolkit.awtLock JDK-8064407 core-libs (fc) FileChannel transferTo should use TransmitFile on Windows JDK-8066612 core-libs Add a test that will call getDeclaredFields() on all classes and try t JDK-8051641 core-libs Africa/Casablanca transitions is incorrectly calculated starting from JDK-8068338 core-libs Better message about incompatible zlib in Deflater.init JDK-8064846 core-libs Lazy-init thread safety problems in core reflection JDK-8067774 core-libs Local variable type calculation mismatch JDK-8060170 core-libs Support SIO_LOOPBACK_FAST_PATH option on Windows JDK-8062896 core-libs TEST_BUG: java/lang/Thread/ThreadStateTest.java can't compile with cha JDK-8067854 core-libs bound java static method throws NPE when 'null' is used for this argum JDK-8067241 core-svc DeadlockTest.java failed with negative timeout value JDK-8034263 core-svc Test java/lang/management/MemoryMXBean/LowMemoryTest.java fails interm JDK-8058506 core-svc ThreadMXBeanStateTest throws exception JDK-8066952 core-svc [TEST-BUG] javax/management/monitor/CounterMonitorTest.java hangs JDK-8064441 core-svc java/lang/management/ThreadMXBean/Locks.java fails intermittently, blo JDK-8038794 core-svc java/lang/management/ThreadMXBean/SynchronizationStatistics.java fails JDK-7132590 core-svc javax/management/remote/mandatory/notif/NotificationAccessControllerTe JDK-8067151 other-libs [TESTBUG] com/sun/corba/5036554/TestCorbaBug.sh From valerie.peng at oracle.com Mon Jan 5 23:17:12 2015 From: valerie.peng at oracle.com (Valerie Peng) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 15:17:12 -0800 Subject: [8u60] request for approval: 8039921: SHA1WithDSA with key > 1024 bits not working Message-ID: <54AB1B78.2010707@oracle.com> Request for approval for backporting 8039921 into 8u60. bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039921 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8039921/webrev.00/ jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011554.html The changes (source code diffs) are exactly the same as those made to JDK 9 except for copyright year being 2015. Thanks, Valerie From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 03:11:47 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 03:11:47 +0000 Subject: [8u60] request for approval: 8039921: SHA1WithDSA with key > 1024 bits not working In-Reply-To: <54AB1B78.2010707@oracle.com> References: <54AB1B78.2010707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AB5273.4090000@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 05/01/15 23:17, Valerie Peng wrote: > > Request for approval for backporting 8039921 into 8u60. > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039921 > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/8039921/webrev.00/ > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011554.html > > The changes (source code diffs) are exactly the same as those made to > JDK 9 except for copyright year being 2015. > > Thanks, > Valerie From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 13:28:16 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 18:58:16 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068462: javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getParameter spec is not completely consistent with the rest of the API Message-ID: <54ABE2F0.7030407@oracle.com> Please approve. bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068462 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030607.html jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068462/8u60/webrev.00/ Thanks -Sundar From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 14:54:42 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:54:42 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068462: javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getParameter spec is not completely consistent with the rest of the API In-Reply-To: <54ABE2F0.7030407@oracle.com> References: <54ABE2F0.7030407@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54ABF732.3000105@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 06/01/15 13:28, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068462 > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030607.html > jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068462/8u60/webrev.00/ > > Thanks > -Sundar From iris.clark at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 21:27:33 2015 From: iris.clark at oracle.com (Iris Clark) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 13:27:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Maintenance Review of Java SE 8 Platform JSR (337) In-Reply-To: <545121AE.9000301@oracle.com> References: <021db477-e048-4966-89c6-02f315fabcbb@default> <545121AE.9000301@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi, Andy. After careful analysis of Maven Central and the JDK source code itself, we have determined that modifying these system properties poses high compatibility risk with little benefit. The values returned by the system properties java.specification.version and java.vm.specification.version will both continue to report "1.8.0". If an application needs to identify this release, the system property java.version which returns "1.8.0_40" may be used. Thanks, iris -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Herrick Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 10:20 AM To: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: Maintenance Review of Java SE 8 Platform JSR (337) will this result in a new specification version for java, and if so, what will the version be ? (system property java.specification.version) /Andy From iris.clark at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 21:28:45 2015 From: iris.clark at oracle.com (Iris Clark) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 13:28:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Java SE 8 Maintenance Draft Review (JSR 337) posted to jcp.org Message-ID: <14aaa9ba-9fb0-428a-9663-f674818fb11f@default> Happy New Year! The Maintenance Draft Review [0] contents for the Java SE 8 Platform JSR (337) was posted to jcp.org on 31 December 2014 [1]. The contents correspond to the updates outlined in the announcement [2] of our intention to conduct the Review and this approval request [3] to deprecate the Extension and Endorsed-Standards Override Mechanism. Note that there is no change to the values returned by the system properties java.specification.version and java.vm.specification.version [4]. The Review ends on 2 February 2015 with the Ballot running from 3-9 February 2015. As in the original announcement, assuming that the Maintenance Review Ballot succeeds, Oracle will produce a Maintenance Release [5] of JSR 337 which includes an updated Specification, RI, and TCK. The Maintenance Release is expected about the same time as JDK 8 Update 40 [6], March 2015. Thanks, iris [0] https://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#5.2 [1] https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=337 [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-October/002302.html [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-December/002648.html [4] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002807.html [5] https://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#5.3 [6] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/8u/releases/8u40.html From mandy.chung at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 22:05:31 2015 From: mandy.chung at oracle.com (Mandy Chung) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:05:31 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API Message-ID: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> Webrev at : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK signature test and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps simply hardcodes it. Mandy From lance.andersen at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 22:15:54 2015 From: lance.andersen at oracle.com (Lance Andersen) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 17:15:54 -0500 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API In-Reply-To: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> References: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> Message-ID: looks OK Mandy Best, Lance On Jan 6, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: > Webrev at : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 > > This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK signature test > and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps simply hardcodes it. > > Mandy Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 Lance.Andersen at oracle.com From david.dehaven at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 22:20:53 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 14:20:53 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API In-Reply-To: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> References: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> Message-ID: <55647811-42D1-4180-97B7-8751B0431A72@oracle.com> Looks fine to me. -DrD- > Webrev at : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 > > This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK signature test > and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps simply hardcodes it. > > Mandy From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 6 22:52:18 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 22:52:18 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API In-Reply-To: <55647811-42D1-4180-97B7-8751B0431A72@oracle.com> References: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> <55647811-42D1-4180-97B7-8751B0431A72@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AC6722.7070606@oracle.com> Approved for push. Please add an appropriate noreg keyword and, presumably 9-na? -Rob On 06/01/15 22:20, David DeHaven wrote: > Looks fine to me. > > -DrD- > >> Webrev at : >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 >> >> This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK signature test >> and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps simply hardcodes it. >> >> Mandy From Alan.Bateman at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 08:16:40 2015 From: Alan.Bateman at oracle.com (Alan Bateman) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 08:16:40 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API In-Reply-To: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> References: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54ACEB68.2020002@oracle.com> On 06/01/2015 22:05, Mandy Chung wrote: > Webrev at : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 > > This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK signature > test > and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps > simply hardcodes it. This looks okay to me. Having it check for javax.** might be an option too (on the assumption that there won't be module-private javax.* packages). -Alan From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 08:43:48 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 14:13:48 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068524: NashornScriptEngineFactory.getParameter() throws IAE for an unknown key, doesn't conform to the general spec Message-ID: <54ACF1C4.5000602@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068524 jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068524/8u60/ jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004078.html Thanks, -Sundar From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 09:14:01 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 09:14:01 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068524: NashornScriptEngineFactory.getParameter() throws IAE for an unknown key, doesn't conform to the general spec In-Reply-To: <54ACF1C4.5000602@oracle.com> References: <54ACF1C4.5000602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54ACF8D9.2080606@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 07/01/2015 08:43, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068524 > jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068524/8u60/ > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004078.html > > Thanks, > -Sundar From shanliang.jiang at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 13:57:49 2015 From: shanliang.jiang at oracle.com (shanliang) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 14:57:49 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068418: NotificationBufferDeadlockTest.java throw exception: java.lang.Exception: TEST FAILED: Deadlock detected Message-ID: <54AD3B5D.4090108@oracle.com> Please approve this clean backport: Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-January/016307.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a11462e42173 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068418 thanks, Shanliang From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 14:35:48 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 14:35:48 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068418: NotificationBufferDeadlockTest.java throw exception: java.lang.Exception: TEST FAILED: Deadlock detected In-Reply-To: <54AD3B5D.4090108@oracle.com> References: <54AD3B5D.4090108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AD4444.8030101@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 07/01/15 13:57, shanliang wrote: > Please approve this clean backport: > > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-January/016307.html > JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a11462e42173 > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068418 > > thanks, > Shanliang From mandy.chung at oracle.com Wed Jan 7 17:53:23 2015 From: mandy.chung at oracle.com (Mandy Chung) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 09:53:23 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request Review: 8068548 jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API In-Reply-To: <54ACEB68.2020002@oracle.com> References: <54AC5C2B.5050505@oracle.com> <54ACEB68.2020002@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AD7293.70500@oracle.com> On 1/7/2015 12:16 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 06/01/2015 22:05, Mandy Chung wrote: >> Webrev at : >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8068548/webrev.00/ >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068548 >> >> This is 1-line fix. The 8u40 fix for JDK-8039007 breaks TCK >> signature test >> and @jdk.Exported should only be used by JDK-specific API. jdeps >> simply hardcodes it. > This looks okay to me. Having it check for javax.** might be an option > too (on the assumption that there won't be module-private javax.* > packages). I thought about that. jdeps -jdkinternals currently flags APIs as internal if they are not supported by JDK and there isn't any javax.* other than javax.jnlp. For JDK 9, the exported APIs will be determined properly from modules. Therefore I just check for javax.jnlp instead of javax.*. Mandy From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 06:52:16 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 12:22:16 +0530 Subject: RFR 8068650: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 Message-ID: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> Hi, Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 This issue was caused by another makefile fix to generate docs for nashorn. I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev and jdk8u-dev as the fix has to be in jdk8u release(s). jdk9 has proper makefile changes (jdk8u only issue). Thanks, -Sundar From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 11:57:01 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 11:57:01 +0000 Subject: Request for approval : [8u-dev] : (fc) Rename the new jdk.net.enableFastFileTransfer system property to jdk.nio.enableFastFileTransfer Message-ID: <54AE708D.2060602@oracle.com> I'd like to push this trivial change to jdk8u-dev. Same change as JDK 9. Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068507 JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/bc74cc84c49e review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2015-January/002977.html regards, Sean. From james.laskey at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 13:13:36 2015 From: james.laskey at oracle.com (Jim Laskey (Oracle)) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 09:13:36 -0400 Subject: RFR 8068650: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 In-Reply-To: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> References: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> Message-ID: <3B353EDE-997A-4CC7-92E7-C85DE7EABB27@oracle.com> +1 On Jan 8, 2015, at 2:52 AM, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Hi, > > Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 > > This issue was caused by another makefile fix to generate docs for nashorn. I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev and jdk8u-dev as the fix has to be in jdk8u release(s). jdk9 has proper makefile changes (jdk8u only issue). > > Thanks, > -Sundar From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 13:16:13 2015 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:16:13 +0100 Subject: RFR 8068650: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 In-Reply-To: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> References: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AE831D.8090305@oracle.com> +1 Am 2015-01-08 um 07:52 schrieb A. Sundararajan: > Hi, > > Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/ for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 > > This issue was caused by another makefile fix to generate docs for > nashorn. I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev and jdk8u-dev as the fix has to be in > jdk8u release(s). jdk9 has proper makefile changes (jdk8u only issue). > > Thanks, > -Sundar From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 14:30:47 2015 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 15:30:47 +0100 Subject: RFR 8068650: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 In-Reply-To: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> References: <54AE2920.7080107@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AE9497.2090006@oracle.com> Looks good to me. /Erik On 2015-01-08 07:52, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Hi, > > Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/ for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 > > This issue was caused by another makefile fix to generate docs for > nashorn. I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev and jdk8u-dev as the fix has to be in > jdk8u release(s). jdk9 has proper makefile changes (jdk8u only issue). > > Thanks, > -Sundar From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 15:04:04 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 20:34:04 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request 8068650: $jdk/api/javac/tree contains docs for nashorn Message-ID: <54AE9C64.2080108@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/webrev.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-January/013958.html Thanks, -Sundar From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 15:06:14 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 15:06:14 +0000 Subject: Request for approval : [8u-dev] : (fc) Rename the new jdk.net.enableFastFileTransfer system property to jdk.nio.enableFastFileTransfer In-Reply-To: <54AE708D.2060602@oracle.com> References: <54AE708D.2060602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AE9CE6.9030905@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 08/01/15 11:57, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I'd like to push this trivial change to jdk8u-dev. Same change as JDK 9. > > Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068507 > JDK 9 changeset : > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/bc74cc84c49e > review thread : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2015-January/002977.html > > regards, > Sean. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 8 15:07:15 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 15:07:15 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request 8068650: $jdk/api/javac/tree contains docs for nashorn In-Reply-To: <54AE9C64.2080108@oracle.com> References: <54AE9C64.2080108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AE9D23.7060006@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 08/01/15 15:04, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068650 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068650/webrev.00/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-January/013958.html > > Thanks, > -Sundar From joe.darcy at oracle.com Fri Jan 9 02:30:20 2015 From: joe.darcy at oracle.com (Joseph D. Darcy) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:30:20 -0800 Subject: [8u60] approval request for JDK-8068639: Make certain annotation classfile warnings opt-in Message-ID: <54AF3D3C.9090202@oracle.com> Hello, For your approval consideration: JDK-8068639: Make certain annotation classfile warnings opt-in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068639 Review thread for JDK 9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2015-January/009226.html Other than the copyright update, the changes apply cleanly to JDK 8u post patch-shuffling: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8068639.8u/ All langtools regression tests pass with the change. (The change has also already been applied to the 7 update train.) Thanks, -Joe From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 9 09:17:52 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:17:52 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for JDK-8068639: Make certain annotation classfile warnings opt-in In-Reply-To: <54AF3D3C.9090202@oracle.com> References: <54AF3D3C.9090202@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54AF9CC0.9090305@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 09/01/2015 02:30, Joseph D. Darcy wrote: > Hello, > > For your approval consideration: > > JDK-8068639: Make certain annotation classfile warnings opt-in > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068639 > > Review thread for JDK 9: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2015-January/009226.html > > > Other than the copyright update, the changes apply cleanly to JDK 8u > post patch-shuffling: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8068639.8u/ > > All langtools regression tests pass with the change. > > (The change has also already been applied to the 7 update train.) > > Thanks, > > -Joe From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Fri Jan 9 19:33:47 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 12:33:47 -0700 Subject: [8u40] RDP2 Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.40-b24 Message-ID: <54B02D1B.7040506@oracle.com> Requesting approval to integrate hs25.40-b24 into jdk8u40-b21. A webrev is available at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u40/hs25.40-b24-jdk8u40-b21.webrev/ Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. They are all approved for integration into 8u40. 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails 8068631: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b24 -- Alejandro From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 9 20:15:58 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 20:15:58 +0000 Subject: [8u40] RDP2 Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.40-b24 In-Reply-To: <54B02D1B.7040506@oracle.com> References: <54B02D1B.7040506@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B036FE.5080708@oracle.com> Approved pending positive PIT results. regards, Sean. On 09/01/2015 19:33, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > Requesting approval to integrate hs25.40-b24 into jdk8u40-b21. > > A webrev is available at: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u40/hs25.40-b24-jdk8u40-b21.webrev/ > > Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed > only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. > > The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone > nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. > They are all approved for integration into 8u40. > > 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space > 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails > 8068631: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b24 > From david.dehaven at oracle.com Sat Jan 10 04:45:32 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 20:45:32 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework Message-ID: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> Please review the open source changes for 8043340. The goal here is to get jdk8u to build on Mac OS X 10.9+ systems where Xcode 5+ and Xcode 4 are co-installed, a configuration which is becoming more and more commonplace as more developers are focusing on JDK 9 now (which needs Xcode 5 installed), not to mention new systems ship with 10.10 which only supports the Xcode 5/6 command line tools. It's too much of a hassle to maintain separate systems for building jdk8u and JPRT isn't suitable for frequent changes so something must be done to address this. The jdk changes are similar to those done for JDK9, though I removed the changes for building with Xcode 5 (JDK-8043591) since we do not support building JDK 8 with clang. The hotspot changes are almost identical, the lack of SYSROOT_CFLAGS necessitated changing the logic in saproc.make a bit. It still builds with or without spec.gmk, though without it you will either need to define SDKPATH or have a sane Xcode 4 installation. For the top level build system: - most of the logic of sanitizing the Xcode build environment is in toolchain.m4 - the LIPO variable was removed since it was completely unused - OTOOL was moved to after the Xcode sanitizing so it can be picked up from DEVELOPER_DIR if needed - MACOSX_UNIVERSAL is now being set to false by default and ALT_MACOSX_UNIVERSAL was added to hotspot-spec.gmk.in so the hotspot build is in sync with the jdk build (this was a bug, IMHO) That last change removed any need to run lipo (only done in hotspot), so the fact that /usr/bin/lipo is broken with Xcode 4 is a non-issue. There is a weird case where some early versions of the Xcode 5 command line tools installed /usr/bin/{gcc|g++} as a symlink to {clang|clang++}, that case is handled by putting $DEVELOPER_DIR/usr/bin on the path so autoconf picks up the actual gcc executable. JBS Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/top http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/hotspot http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/jdk JPRT runs are being kicked off. I'll have one run from hotspot directly. I'll post results here. -DrD- From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 10:35:56 2015 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:35:56 +0100 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> Hello, These changes look ok to me. With these changes, configure will unconditionally fail if trying to use XCode 5. I know we don't officially support using XCode 5 for JDK 8, but aren't people working around it with some patches? How hard would it be to make it at least build? /Erik On 2015-01-10 05:45, David DeHaven wrote: > Please review the open source changes for 8043340. The goal here is to get jdk8u to build on Mac OS X 10.9+ systems where Xcode 5+ and Xcode 4 are co-installed, a configuration which is becoming more and more commonplace as more developers are focusing on JDK 9 now (which needs Xcode 5 installed), not to mention new systems ship with 10.10 which only supports the Xcode 5/6 command line tools. It's too much of a hassle to maintain separate systems for building jdk8u and JPRT isn't suitable for frequent changes so something must be done to address this. > > The jdk changes are similar to those done for JDK9, though I removed the changes for building with Xcode 5 (JDK-8043591) since we do not support building JDK 8 with clang. > > The hotspot changes are almost identical, the lack of SYSROOT_CFLAGS necessitated changing the logic in saproc.make a bit. It still builds with or without spec.gmk, though without it you will either need to define SDKPATH or have a sane Xcode 4 installation. > > For the top level build system: > - most of the logic of sanitizing the Xcode build environment is in toolchain.m4 > - the LIPO variable was removed since it was completely unused > - OTOOL was moved to after the Xcode sanitizing so it can be picked up from DEVELOPER_DIR if needed > - MACOSX_UNIVERSAL is now being set to false by default and ALT_MACOSX_UNIVERSAL was added to hotspot-spec.gmk.in so the hotspot build is in sync with the jdk build (this was a bug, IMHO) > > That last change removed any need to run lipo (only done in hotspot), so the fact that /usr/bin/lipo is broken with Xcode 4 is a non-issue. > > There is a weird case where some early versions of the Xcode 5 command line tools installed /usr/bin/{gcc|g++} as a symlink to {clang|clang++}, that case is handled by putting $DEVELOPER_DIR/usr/bin on the path so autoconf picks up the actual gcc executable. > > JBS Issue: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 > > Webrevs: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/top > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/hotspot > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/jdk > > JPRT runs are being kicked off. I'll have one run from hotspot directly. I'll post results here. > > -DrD- > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 11:07:21 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 12:07:21 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068580: make JavaAdapterFactory.isAutoConvertibleFromFunction more robust Message-ID: <2592B27E-08BB-4665-81E3-03816ACB09FE@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068580 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068580/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004081.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 11:08:57 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:08:57 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068580: make JavaAdapterFactory.isAutoConvertibleFromFunction more robust In-Reply-To: <2592B27E-08BB-4665-81E3-03816ACB09FE@oracle.com> References: <2592B27E-08BB-4665-81E3-03816ACB09FE@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B3AB49.1030907@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 12/01/15 11:07, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068580 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068580/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004081.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 13:37:17 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 14:37:17 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068784: Halve the function object creation code size Message-ID: <9766DAFC-954C-490D-8EA7-02BFB39BE11E@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068784 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068784/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004089.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 13:43:15 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 13:43:15 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068784: Halve the function object creation code size In-Reply-To: <9766DAFC-954C-490D-8EA7-02BFB39BE11E@oracle.com> References: <9766DAFC-954C-490D-8EA7-02BFB39BE11E@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B3CF73.5010804@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 12/01/15 13:37, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068784 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068784/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004089.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From david.dehaven at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 15:28:34 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 07:28:34 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> It won't build at all with Xcode 5, there is no gcc compiler and the clang changes were never backported to jdk8u. -DrD- > Hello, > > These changes look ok to me. > > With these changes, configure will unconditionally fail if trying to use XCode 5. I know we don't officially support using XCode 5 for JDK 8, but aren't people working around it with some patches? How hard would it be to make it at least build? > > /Erik > > On 2015-01-10 05:45, David DeHaven wrote: >> Please review the open source changes for 8043340. The goal here is to get jdk8u to build on Mac OS X 10.9+ systems where Xcode 5+ and Xcode 4 are co-installed, a configuration which is becoming more and more commonplace as more developers are focusing on JDK 9 now (which needs Xcode 5 installed), not to mention new systems ship with 10.10 which only supports the Xcode 5/6 command line tools. It's too much of a hassle to maintain separate systems for building jdk8u and JPRT isn't suitable for frequent changes so something must be done to address this. >> >> The jdk changes are similar to those done for JDK9, though I removed the changes for building with Xcode 5 (JDK-8043591) since we do not support building JDK 8 with clang. >> >> The hotspot changes are almost identical, the lack of SYSROOT_CFLAGS necessitated changing the logic in saproc.make a bit. It still builds with or without spec.gmk, though without it you will either need to define SDKPATH or have a sane Xcode 4 installation. >> >> For the top level build system: >> - most of the logic of sanitizing the Xcode build environment is in toolchain.m4 >> - the LIPO variable was removed since it was completely unused >> - OTOOL was moved to after the Xcode sanitizing so it can be picked up from DEVELOPER_DIR if needed >> - MACOSX_UNIVERSAL is now being set to false by default and ALT_MACOSX_UNIVERSAL was added to hotspot-spec.gmk.in so the hotspot build is in sync with the jdk build (this was a bug, IMHO) >> >> That last change removed any need to run lipo (only done in hotspot), so the fact that /usr/bin/lipo is broken with Xcode 4 is a non-issue. >> >> There is a weird case where some early versions of the Xcode 5 command line tools installed /usr/bin/{gcc|g++} as a symlink to {clang|clang++}, that case is handled by putting $DEVELOPER_DIR/usr/bin on the path so autoconf picks up the actual gcc executable. >> >> JBS Issue: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 >> >> Webrevs: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/top >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/hotspot >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/jdk >> >> JPRT runs are being kicked off. I'll have one run from hotspot directly. I'll post results here. >> >> -DrD- >> > From david.dehaven at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 16:25:21 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 08:25:21 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> Message-ID: <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> Or rather, the point of this exercise is to eliminate the hacks to get it to build with Xcode 5 (I'm not sure if anyone was truly successful with that). It's far better to just build with Xcode 4.6.3, and with these changes you don't even need to pre-sanitize your Xcode environment. A proper build setup would have Xcode 5 or 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app (generally MAS managed) and Xcode 4.6.3 (still available for download on ADC) somewhere NOT directly in /Applications (the Mac App Store has a nasty habit of "upgrading" it when it sees it there). I keep mine in /Applications/old along with a copy of Xcode 5.1.1 for test purposes. The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. I'm kind of bummed I didn't get to show my really nasty hack for working around the broken lipo stub tool, it was so horrible it could be considered artwork! :) -DrD- > It won't build at all with Xcode 5, there is no gcc compiler and the clang changes were never backported to jdk8u. > > -DrD- > >> Hello, >> >> These changes look ok to me. >> >> With these changes, configure will unconditionally fail if trying to use XCode 5. I know we don't officially support using XCode 5 for JDK 8, but aren't people working around it with some patches? How hard would it be to make it at least build? >> >> /Erik >> >> On 2015-01-10 05:45, David DeHaven wrote: >>> Please review the open source changes for 8043340. The goal here is to get jdk8u to build on Mac OS X 10.9+ systems where Xcode 5+ and Xcode 4 are co-installed, a configuration which is becoming more and more commonplace as more developers are focusing on JDK 9 now (which needs Xcode 5 installed), not to mention new systems ship with 10.10 which only supports the Xcode 5/6 command line tools. It's too much of a hassle to maintain separate systems for building jdk8u and JPRT isn't suitable for frequent changes so something must be done to address this. >>> >>> The jdk changes are similar to those done for JDK9, though I removed the changes for building with Xcode 5 (JDK-8043591) since we do not support building JDK 8 with clang. >>> >>> The hotspot changes are almost identical, the lack of SYSROOT_CFLAGS necessitated changing the logic in saproc.make a bit. It still builds with or without spec.gmk, though without it you will either need to define SDKPATH or have a sane Xcode 4 installation. >>> >>> For the top level build system: >>> - most of the logic of sanitizing the Xcode build environment is in toolchain.m4 >>> - the LIPO variable was removed since it was completely unused >>> - OTOOL was moved to after the Xcode sanitizing so it can be picked up from DEVELOPER_DIR if needed >>> - MACOSX_UNIVERSAL is now being set to false by default and ALT_MACOSX_UNIVERSAL was added to hotspot-spec.gmk.in so the hotspot build is in sync with the jdk build (this was a bug, IMHO) >>> >>> That last change removed any need to run lipo (only done in hotspot), so the fact that /usr/bin/lipo is broken with Xcode 4 is a non-issue. >>> >>> There is a weird case where some early versions of the Xcode 5 command line tools installed /usr/bin/{gcc|g++} as a symlink to {clang|clang++}, that case is handled by putting $DEVELOPER_DIR/usr/bin on the path so autoconf picks up the actual gcc executable. >>> >>> JBS Issue: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 >>> >>> Webrevs: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/top >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/hotspot >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/jdk >>> >>> JPRT runs are being kicked off. I'll have one run from hotspot directly. I'll post results here. >>> >>> -DrD- >>> >> > From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 16:30:08 2015 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:30:08 +0100 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B3F690.5090309@oracle.com> I'm happy with that answer. Thanks! /Erik On 2015-01-12 17:25, David DeHaven wrote: > Or rather, the point of this exercise is to eliminate the hacks to get it to build with Xcode 5 (I'm not sure if anyone was truly successful with that). It's far better to just build with Xcode 4.6.3, and with these changes you don't even need to pre-sanitize your Xcode environment. > > A proper build setup would have Xcode 5 or 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app (generally MAS managed) and Xcode 4.6.3 (still available for download on ADC) somewhere NOT directly in /Applications (the Mac App Store has a nasty habit of "upgrading" it when it sees it there). I keep mine in /Applications/old along with a copy of Xcode 5.1.1 for test purposes. > > The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. > > > I'm kind of bummed I didn't get to show my really nasty hack for working around the broken lipo stub tool, it was so horrible it could be considered artwork! :) > > -DrD- > >> It won't build at all with Xcode 5, there is no gcc compiler and the clang changes were never backported to jdk8u. >> >> -DrD- >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> These changes look ok to me. >>> >>> With these changes, configure will unconditionally fail if trying to use XCode 5. I know we don't officially support using XCode 5 for JDK 8, but aren't people working around it with some patches? How hard would it be to make it at least build? >>> >>> /Erik >>> >>> On 2015-01-10 05:45, David DeHaven wrote: >>>> Please review the open source changes for 8043340. The goal here is to get jdk8u to build on Mac OS X 10.9+ systems where Xcode 5+ and Xcode 4 are co-installed, a configuration which is becoming more and more commonplace as more developers are focusing on JDK 9 now (which needs Xcode 5 installed), not to mention new systems ship with 10.10 which only supports the Xcode 5/6 command line tools. It's too much of a hassle to maintain separate systems for building jdk8u and JPRT isn't suitable for frequent changes so something must be done to address this. >>>> >>>> The jdk changes are similar to those done for JDK9, though I removed the changes for building with Xcode 5 (JDK-8043591) since we do not support building JDK 8 with clang. >>>> >>>> The hotspot changes are almost identical, the lack of SYSROOT_CFLAGS necessitated changing the logic in saproc.make a bit. It still builds with or without spec.gmk, though without it you will either need to define SDKPATH or have a sane Xcode 4 installation. >>>> >>>> For the top level build system: >>>> - most of the logic of sanitizing the Xcode build environment is in toolchain.m4 >>>> - the LIPO variable was removed since it was completely unused >>>> - OTOOL was moved to after the Xcode sanitizing so it can be picked up from DEVELOPER_DIR if needed >>>> - MACOSX_UNIVERSAL is now being set to false by default and ALT_MACOSX_UNIVERSAL was added to hotspot-spec.gmk.in so the hotspot build is in sync with the jdk build (this was a bug, IMHO) >>>> >>>> That last change removed any need to run lipo (only done in hotspot), so the fact that /usr/bin/lipo is broken with Xcode 4 is a non-issue. >>>> >>>> There is a weird case where some early versions of the Xcode 5 command line tools installed /usr/bin/{gcc|g++} as a symlink to {clang|clang++}, that case is handled by putting $DEVELOPER_DIR/usr/bin on the path so autoconf picks up the actual gcc executable. >>>> >>>> JBS Issue: >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 >>>> >>>> Webrevs: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/top >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/hotspot >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v0/jdk >>>> >>>> JPRT runs are being kicked off. I'll have one run from hotspot directly. I'll post results here. >>>> >>>> -DrD- >>>> From david.dehaven at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 17:05:28 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 09:05:28 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> Message-ID: > The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. Ugh. I broke something along the way, this doesn't *quite* work. xcrun complains with "xcrun: error: missing DEVELOPER_DIR path:" I think I'm exporting an empty DEVELOPER_DIR. I shall fix and update. -DrD- From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 17:54:03 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 10:54:03 -0700 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.60-b01 Message-ID: <54B40A3B.2040001@oracle.com> Requesting approval to integrate hs25.60-b01 into jdk8u60-b01. A webrev is available at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u60/hs25.60-b01-jdk8u60-b01.webrev/ Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. 8035663: Suspicious failure of test java/util/concurrent/Phaser/FickleRegister.java 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space 8039995: Test serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java fails on some Linux/Mac machines. 8058345: Refactor native stack printing from vmError.cpp to debug.cpp to make it available in gdb as well 8058935: CPU detection gives 0 cores per cpu, 2 threads per core in Amazon EC2 environment 8061785: [TEST_BUG] serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java has utf8 character corrupted by earlier merge 8065915: Fix includes after 8058148: MaxNodeLimit and LiveNodeCountInliningCutoff 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails 8067802: Update the Hotspot version numbers in Hotspot for JDK 8u60 -- Alejandro From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 18:52:02 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 18:52:02 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.60-b01 In-Reply-To: <54B40A3B.2040001@oracle.com> References: <54B40A3B.2040001@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B417D2.2050205@oracle.com> Approved pending positive PIT. -Rob On 12/01/15 17:54, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > Requesting approval to integrate hs25.60-b01 into jdk8u60-b01. > > A webrev is available at: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u60/hs25.60-b01-jdk8u60-b01.webrev/ > > Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed > only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. > > The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone > nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. > > 8035663: Suspicious failure of test > java/util/concurrent/Phaser/FickleRegister.java > 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space > 8039995: Test serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java fails > on some Linux/Mac machines. > 8058345: Refactor native stack printing from vmError.cpp to debug.cpp > to make it available in gdb as well > 8058935: CPU detection gives 0 cores per cpu, 2 threads per core in > Amazon EC2 environment > 8061785: [TEST_BUG] serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java > has utf8 character corrupted by earlier merge > 8065915: Fix includes after 8058148: MaxNodeLimit and > LiveNodeCountInliningCutoff > 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails > 8067802: Update the Hotspot version numbers in Hotspot for JDK 8u60 > From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 23:40:59 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:40:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068485: Update references of download.oracle.com to docs.oracle.com in javadoc makefile Message-ID: <65fa6eb7-edab-410f-a57e-ae8f5d782a38@default> Hi, In the javadoc makefile, there are references to http://download.oracle.com. This automatically gets redirected to http://docs.oracle.com. These references needs to be updated to point to https://docs.oracle.com. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068485 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068485/webrev.00/ This fix is for 8u40. Can you please review it? Thanks, Bhavesh. From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 23:45:36 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:45:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. Message-ID: <942dcf73-e6ec-4f6f-a8b5-3bc62c1b4be4@default> Hi, The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the jdk repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068491 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068491/webrev.00/ Can you please review this fix? Thanks, Bhavesh. From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Mon Jan 12 23:47:28 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 15:47:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068495: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in langtools. Message-ID: <5f809d05-fa05-4c1d-b80e-c7e09abef771@default> Hi, The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the langtools repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068495 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068495/webrev.00/ Can you please review this fix? Thanks, Bhavesh. From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 08:05:52 2015 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 09:05:52 +0100 Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068485: Update references of download.oracle.com to docs.oracle.com in javadoc makefile In-Reply-To: <65fa6eb7-edab-410f-a57e-ae8f5d782a38@default> References: <65fa6eb7-edab-410f-a57e-ae8f5d782a38@default> Message-ID: <54B4D1E0.6090006@oracle.com> Looks good to me. /Erik On 2015-01-13 00:40, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Hi, > In the javadoc makefile, there are references to http://download.oracle.com. This automatically gets redirected to http://docs.oracle.com. These references needs to be updated to point to https://docs.oracle.com. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068485 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068485/webrev.00/ > > This fix is for 8u40. Can you please review it? > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 12:42:12 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 12:42:12 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for phase 2 approval for 8068650,8068548 Message-ID: <54B512A4.2000703@oracle.com> Seeking approval to have these 2 bug fixes included in the 8u40 stabilization forest. 8068650: $jdk/api/javac/tree contains docs for nashorn 8068548: jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported API Both are already in the 8u60 codeline and have been approved for inclusion there. JPRT testing shows no issues. http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002824.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002812.html regards, Sean. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 15:39:00 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:39:00 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068889: Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects Message-ID: <39F75DEC-5464-4C47-9D62-FB49BEE3A378@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068889 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068889/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004092.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 16:02:04 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:02:04 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. In-Reply-To: <942dcf73-e6ec-4f6f-a8b5-3bc62c1b4be4@default> References: <942dcf73-e6ec-4f6f-a8b5-3bc62c1b4be4@default> Message-ID: <54B5417C.2050507@oracle.com> This looks fine to me Bhavesh. You can use me as reviewer if necessary. Are you going to push to JDK 9 first as per process ? You also need a noreg- label in your bug report. This has to go into 8u60 (jdk8u-dev) before 8u40. Rob or I can help getting it pushed to 8u40 stabilization forest. http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html Regards, Sean. On 12/01/2015 23:45, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Hi, > The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the jdk repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068491 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068491/webrev.00/ > > Can you please review this fix? > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 16:02:37 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:02:37 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068495: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in langtools. In-Reply-To: <5f809d05-fa05-4c1d-b80e-c7e09abef771@default> References: <5f809d05-fa05-4c1d-b80e-c7e09abef771@default> Message-ID: <54B5419D.6050907@oracle.com> Similarly Bhavesh, this looks fine to me. What are your plans for JDK 9 ? regards, Sean. On 12/01/2015 23:47, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Hi, > The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the langtools repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068495 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068495/webrev.00/ > > Can you please review this fix? > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. From shanliang.jiang at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 16:35:17 2015 From: shanliang.jiang at oracle.com (shanliang) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:35:17 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8038322, 8068774 Message-ID: <54B54945.9000001@oracle.com> Please approve these 2 clean backports: 8038322: CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java fails intermittently, presumed deadlock Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-May/014766.html bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038322 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/32ef8cd730ec 8068774 CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java timed out Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-January/016365.html Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068774 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d4586c70acac From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 16:38:12 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 09:38:12 -0700 Subject: jdk8u40-b21: HotSpot Message-ID: <54B549F4.4070308@oracle.com> hs25.40-b24 has been integrated into jdk8u40-b21. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/rev/4e2f3d0f33f5 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/corba/rev/9c54cc92c0be http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/hotspot/rev/25ec4a674337 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxp/rev/78d90db9de28 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxws/rev/16485a38b6bc http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jdk/rev/564bca490631 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/langtools/rev/56183cfc3c3e http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/nashorn/rev/dbb663a9d9aa Component : VM Status : 1 major failures, 1 minor failures Date : 01/13/2015 at 13:00 MSK Tested By : STT_VM Cost(total man-days): 1 Workspace : 2015-01-09-165513.amurillo.hs25-40-b24-snapshot Bundles : 2015-01-09-165513.amurillo.hs25-40-b24-snapshot Platforms : Others Tests :/net/sqenfs-1.sfbay/export1/comp/vm/testbase/ Log : link Browsers : NA Patches : NA Number of Tests Executed : 417109 passed tests, 3795 failed tests (3 new failures) Bug verification status: ====================================== Tested, Pass: Tested, Pass (partial fixes): Tested, Fail: Untested bug fixes: 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails 8068631: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b24 New bugs filed: Bugs in PIT build: Bugs in earlier promoted build: 8068881: SIGBUS in C2 compiled method weblogic.wsee.jaxws.framework.jaxrpc.EnvironmentFactory$SimulatedWsdlDefinitions. Number of PIT requested: 1 Integration target J2SE build number: jdk8u40-b21 Issues and Notes: This is PIT for HS25.40-b24 for jdk8u40-b21. Go for integration. -- Alejandro From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 17:12:02 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:12:02 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8038322, 8068774 In-Reply-To: <54B54945.9000001@oracle.com> References: <54B54945.9000001@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B551E2.5010901@oracle.com> 8038322 is closed as a duplicate. Did you mean 8031036? If so please add noreg-self. 8068774 & 8031036 are approved for push. -Rob On 13/01/15 16:35, shanliang wrote: > Please approve these 2 clean backports: > > 8038322: CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java fails intermittently, > presumed deadlock > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-May/014766.html > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038322 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/32ef8cd730ec > > > 8068774 CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java timed out > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-January/016365.html > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068774 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d4586c70acac From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 17:29:26 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:29:26 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068889: Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects In-Reply-To: <39F75DEC-5464-4C47-9D62-FB49BEE3A378@oracle.com> References: <39F75DEC-5464-4C47-9D62-FB49BEE3A378@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B555F6.1030507@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 13/01/2015 15:39, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068889 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068889/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004092.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 17:35:55 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:35:55 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for phase 2 approval for 8068650,8068548 In-Reply-To: <54B512A4.2000703@oracle.com> References: <54B512A4.2000703@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B5577B.2010706@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 13/01/15 12:42, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Seeking approval to have these 2 bug fixes included in the 8u40 > stabilization forest. > > 8068650: $jdk/api/javac/tree contains docs for nashorn > 8068548: jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as > supported API > > Both are already in the 8u60 codeline and have been approved for > inclusion there. JPRT testing shows no issues. > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002824.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002812.html > > regards, > Sean. > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 17:57:51 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 17:57:51 +0000 Subject: hg: jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk: 8031036: com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java failed on 8b121 In-Reply-To: <201501131752.t0DHqI5T016167@aojmv0008> References: <201501131752.t0DHqI5T016167@aojmv0008> Message-ID: <54B55C9F.2010707@oracle.com> Hi Shanliang, I didn't see an approval request come in for this push. For records purposes, can you log one ? http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html thanks, Sean. On 13/01/2015 17:52, shanliang.jiang at oracle.com wrote: > Changeset: 9930bd0b3cee > Author: sjiang > Date: 2014-05-02 14:40 +0200 > URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/9930bd0b3cee > > 8031036: com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java failed on 8b121 > Reviewed-by: dfuchs > > ! test/javax/management/monitor/CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java > From shanliang.jiang at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:27:01 2015 From: shanliang.jiang at oracle.com (shanliang) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:27:01 +0100 Subject: hg: jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk: 8031036: com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java failed on 8b121 In-Reply-To: <54B55C9F.2010707@oracle.com> References: <201501131752.t0DHqI5T016167@aojmv0008> <54B55C9F.2010707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B56375.2050701@oracle.com> Hi Se?n, Sorry I mis-typed the bug Id in my request but got the approval (thanks Rob) in: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002853.html Sorry for the confusion. Thanks, Shanliang Se?n Coffey wrote: > Hi Shanliang, > > I didn't see an approval request come in for this push. For records > purposes, can you log one ? > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html > > thanks, > Sean. > > On 13/01/2015 17:52, shanliang.jiang at oracle.com wrote: >> Changeset: 9930bd0b3cee >> Author: sjiang >> Date: 2014-05-02 14:40 +0200 >> URL: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/9930bd0b3cee >> >> 8031036: >> com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java >> failed on 8b121 >> Reviewed-by: dfuchs >> >> ! test/javax/management/monitor/CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:40:45 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:40:45 +0000 Subject: hg: jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk: 8031036: com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java failed on 8b121 In-Reply-To: <54B56375.2050701@oracle.com> References: <201501131752.t0DHqI5T016167@aojmv0008> <54B55C9F.2010707@oracle.com> <54B56375.2050701@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B566AD.5090502@oracle.com> whoops - I should have remembered your earlier approval request. Thanks for clarifying. No further action needed here then. regards, Sean. On 13/01/2015 18:27, shanliang wrote: > Hi Se?n, > > Sorry I mis-typed the bug Id in my request but got the approval > (thanks Rob) in: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002853.html > > Sorry for the confusion. > > Thanks, > Shanliang > > Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Hi Shanliang, >> >> I didn't see an approval request come in for this push. For records >> purposes, can you log one ? >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html >> >> thanks, >> Sean. >> >> On 13/01/2015 17:52, shanliang.jiang at oracle.com wrote: >>> Changeset: 9930bd0b3cee >>> Author: sjiang >>> Date: 2014-05-02 14:40 +0200 >>> URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/9930bd0b3cee >>> >>> 8031036: >>> com/sun/management/OperatingSystemMXBean/GetCommittedVirtualMemorySize.java >>> failed on 8b121 >>> Reviewed-by: dfuchs >>> >>> ! test/javax/management/monitor/CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.java >>> >> > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:49:15 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:49:15 +0100 Subject: [8u40] Request for phase 2 approval: 8068889: Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects Message-ID: Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068889 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068889/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004092.html Reviewers: jlaskey, sundar Rationale: this bug is present in 8u25 and is known to cause a serious regression when upgrading from pre-8u25. Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u40-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. The change is already backported in its current form to 8u-dev. Thanks, Attila. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:52:08 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 18:52:08 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for phase 2 approval: 8068889: Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54B56958.4030602@oracle.com> This bug doesn't appear to have phase 2 approval Attila. -Rob On 13/01/15 18:49, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068889 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068889/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004092.html > Reviewers: jlaskey, sundar > Rationale: this bug is present in 8u25 and is known to cause a serious regression when upgrading from pre-8u25. > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u40-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. The change is already backported in its current form to 8u-dev. > > Thanks, > Attila. From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:54:35 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:54:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. Message-ID: <47af6b7d-8028-45c4-978b-bc3a1cec1394@default> Thanks Sean. It would be great if you can help pushing this fix to 8u60. I am not sure if this patch will apply cleanly to JDK 9. I have not tried it yet. If not, we will have to fix this separately in JDK 9 because there could be additional links introduced in JDK 9 which might need to be updated. Thanks, Bhavesh. ----- Original Message ----- From: sean.coffey at oracle.com To: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com, jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 8:02:07 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. This looks fine to me Bhavesh. You can use me as reviewer if necessary. Are you going to push to JDK 9 first as per process ? You also need a noreg- label in your bug report. This has to go into 8u60 (jdk8u-dev) before 8u40. Rob or I can help getting it pushed to 8u40 stabilization forest. http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html Regards, Sean. On 12/01/2015 23:45, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Hi, > The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the jdk repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068491 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068491/webrev.00/ > > Can you please review this fix? > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 18:59:30 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 10:59:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068495: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in langtools. Message-ID: Just replied for the 8068491 review. Similar situation applies for this fix as well. Regards, Bhavesh. ----- Original Message ----- From: sean.coffey at oracle.com To: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com, jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 8:02:40 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068495: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in langtools. Similarly Bhavesh, this looks fine to me. What are your plans for JDK 9 ? regards, Sean. On 12/01/2015 23:47, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Hi, > The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the langtools repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068495 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068495/webrev.00/ > > Can you please review this fix? > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 19:04:12 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:04:12 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. In-Reply-To: <47af6b7d-8028-45c4-978b-bc3a1cec1394@default> References: <47af6b7d-8028-45c4-978b-bc3a1cec1394@default> Message-ID: <54B56C2C.9090703@oracle.com> Bhavesh, yes - no problem, I can help push these patches to 8u-dev for you. They'll come into 8u40 shortly after that since they have been marked as approved. I'll create JDK 9 records for these doc fixes so that they're not forgotten. Consider 8068491 & 8068495 both approved. regards, Sean. On 13/01/2015 18:54, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Thanks Sean. It would be great if you can help pushing this fix to 8u60. I am not sure if this patch will apply cleanly to JDK 9. I have not tried it yet. If not, we will have to fix this separately in JDK 9 because there could be additional links introduced in JDK 9 which might need to be updated. > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: sean.coffey at oracle.com > To: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com, jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 8:02:07 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. > > This looks fine to me Bhavesh. You can use me as reviewer if necessary. > Are you going to push to JDK 9 first as per process ? You also need a > noreg- label in your bug report. > > This has to go into 8u60 (jdk8u-dev) before 8u40. Rob or I can help > getting it pushed to 8u40 stabilization forest. > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 12/01/2015 23:45, Bhavesh Patel wrote: >> Hi, >> The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the jdk repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068491 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068491/webrev.00/ >> >> Can you please review this fix? >> >> Thanks, >> Bhavesh. From bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Tue Jan 13 19:17:45 2015 From: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com (Bhavesh Patel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 11:17:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. Message-ID: <6172f797-81c6-4300-bc5e-d7404972e985@default> Thanks Sean. Regards, Bhavesh. ----- Original Message ----- From: sean.coffey at oracle.com To: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 11:04:14 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific Subject: Re: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. Bhavesh, yes - no problem, I can help push these patches to 8u-dev for you. They'll come into 8u40 shortly after that since they have been marked as approved. I'll create JDK 9 records for these doc fixes so that they're not forgotten. Consider 8068491 & 8068495 both approved. regards, Sean. On 13/01/2015 18:54, Bhavesh Patel wrote: > Thanks Sean. It would be great if you can help pushing this fix to 8u60. I am not sure if this patch will apply cleanly to JDK 9. I have not tried it yet. If not, we will have to fix this separately in JDK 9 because there could be additional links introduced in JDK 9 which might need to be updated. > > Thanks, > Bhavesh. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: sean.coffey at oracle.com > To: bhavesh.x.patel at oracle.com, jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 8:02:07 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific > Subject: Re: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068491: Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. > > This looks fine to me Bhavesh. You can use me as reviewer if necessary. > Are you going to push to JDK 9 first as per process ? You also need a > noreg- label in your bug report. > > This has to go into 8u60 (jdk8u-dev) before 8u40. Rob or I can help > getting it pushed to 8u40 stabilization forest. > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 12/01/2015 23:45, Bhavesh Patel wrote: >> Hi, >> The protocol for docs.oracle.com is going to be updated from HTTP to HTTPS. Any links to http://docs.oracle.com or http://download.oracle.com should be updated to https://docs.oracle.com. Currently, http://download.oracle.com automatically redirects to http://docs.oracle.com. This fix updated the references under the jdk repository. Please view the JBS entry for more information. >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068491 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068491/webrev.00/ >> >> Can you please review this fix? >> >> Thanks, >> Bhavesh. From david.dehaven at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 03:09:06 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:09:06 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4DC9B291-D302-428C-A5F7-177066C65991@oracle.com> >> The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. > > Ugh. I broke something along the way, this doesn't *quite* work. > > xcrun complains with "xcrun: error: missing DEVELOPER_DIR path:" > > I think I'm exporting an empty DEVELOPER_DIR. I shall fix and update. TL;DR: Please review round 2: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/ (I removed generated-configure.sh to reduce the review size, it will be re-generated prior to pushing) I've tested the following configuration scenarios (output from a shell script I cobbled together..) field values: XC6 - Xcode 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app XC4 - Xcode 4 installed in some other dir (empty) - Argument not passed to configure Result meanings: DEV_DIR set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was properly exported in spec.gmk DEV_DIR NOT set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was not needed (XC4 must be selected to achieve this) Configure failed - Configure properly failed when it detected Xcode > 4 "Selected" Xcode means version reported by xcode-select -p | Xcode selected | --with-xcode-path | DEVELOPER_DIR | result | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | | | DEV_DIR NOT set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | | XC6 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC6 | | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC4 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | | | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | | XC6 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC6 | | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- | XC6 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- All the results are as expected. Please note that --with-xcode-path overrides DEVELOPER_DIR, since that could be set in the environment. (yeah, I went a little OCD on this...) -DrD- From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 08:33:28 2015 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:33:28 +0100 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <4DC9B291-D302-428C-A5F7-177066C65991@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> <4DC9B291-D302-428C-A5F7-177066C65991@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B629D8.8070700@oracle.com> Hello, This looks good to me. Thanks for the detailed table! /Erik On 2015-01-14 04:09, David DeHaven wrote: >>> The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. >> Ugh. I broke something along the way, this doesn't *quite* work. >> >> xcrun complains with "xcrun: error: missing DEVELOPER_DIR path:" >> >> I think I'm exporting an empty DEVELOPER_DIR. I shall fix and update. > TL;DR: Please review round 2: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/ > > (I removed generated-configure.sh to reduce the review size, it will be re-generated prior to pushing) > > > I've tested the following configuration scenarios (output from a shell script I cobbled together..) > > field values: > XC6 - Xcode 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app > XC4 - Xcode 4 installed in some other dir > (empty) - Argument not passed to configure > > Result meanings: > DEV_DIR set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was properly exported in spec.gmk > DEV_DIR NOT set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was not needed (XC4 must be selected to achieve this) > Configure failed - Configure properly failed when it detected Xcode > 4 > > "Selected" Xcode means version reported by xcode-select -p > > > | Xcode selected | --with-xcode-path | DEVELOPER_DIR | result | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | | | DEV_DIR NOT set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | | XC6 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC6 | | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC4 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | | | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | | XC6 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC6 | | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > | XC6 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > All the results are as expected. Please note that --with-xcode-path overrides DEVELOPER_DIR, since that could be set in the environment. > > (yeah, I went a little OCD on this...) > > -DrD- > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 13:31:20 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 13:31:20 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for review and approval: 8068485: Update references of download.oracle.com to docs.oracle.com in javadoc makefile In-Reply-To: <54B4D1E0.6090006@oracle.com> References: <65fa6eb7-edab-410f-a57e-ae8f5d782a38@default> <54B4D1E0.6090006@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B66FA8.4040203@oracle.com> Hi Bhavesh, Approved for jdk8u-dev. I'll help push this patch and the other 2 doc related ones (8068491, 8068495) to jdk8u-dev. I'll also work with you on getting these into 8u40. regards, Sean. On 13/01/15 08:05, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Looks good to me. > > /Erik > > On 2015-01-13 00:40, Bhavesh Patel wrote: >> Hi, >> In the javadoc makefile, there are references to >> http://download.oracle.com. This automatically gets redirected to >> http://docs.oracle.com. These references needs to be updated to point >> to https://docs.oracle.com. >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068485 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpatel/8068485/webrev.00/ >> >> This fix is for 8u40. Can you please review it? >> >> Thanks, >> Bhavesh. > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 19:14:15 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:14:15 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8069002: NPE on invoking null (8068889 regression) Message-ID: <54E7C2C5-8866-49DB-9717-8EDD6D8DB6CE@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069002 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8069002/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004101.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 20:03:12 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 20:03:12 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8069002: NPE on invoking null (8068889 regression) In-Reply-To: <54E7C2C5-8866-49DB-9717-8EDD6D8DB6CE@oracle.com> References: <54E7C2C5-8866-49DB-9717-8EDD6D8DB6CE@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B6CB80.4020204@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 14/01/15 19:14, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069002 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8069002/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004101.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From david.dehaven at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 20:23:50 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 12:23:50 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <54B629D8.8070700@oracle.com> References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> <4DC9B291-D302-428C-A5F7-177066C65991@oracle.com> <54B629D8.8070700@oracle.com> Message-ID: Can someone from hotspot-dev please look at the hotspot changes? -DrD- > Hello, > > This looks good to me. Thanks for the detailed table! > > /Erik > > On 2015-01-14 04:09, David DeHaven wrote: >>>> The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. >>> Ugh. I broke something along the way, this doesn't *quite* work. >>> >>> xcrun complains with "xcrun: error: missing DEVELOPER_DIR path:" >>> >>> I think I'm exporting an empty DEVELOPER_DIR. I shall fix and update. >> TL;DR: Please review round 2: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/ >> >> (I removed generated-configure.sh to reduce the review size, it will be re-generated prior to pushing) >> >> >> I've tested the following configuration scenarios (output from a shell script I cobbled together..) >> >> field values: >> XC6 - Xcode 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app >> XC4 - Xcode 4 installed in some other dir >> (empty) - Argument not passed to configure >> >> Result meanings: >> DEV_DIR set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was properly exported in spec.gmk >> DEV_DIR NOT set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was not needed (XC4 must be selected to achieve this) >> Configure failed - Configure properly failed when it detected Xcode > 4 >> >> "Selected" Xcode means version reported by xcode-select -p >> >> >> | Xcode selected | --with-xcode-path | DEVELOPER_DIR | result | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | | | DEV_DIR NOT set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | | XC6 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC6 | | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC4 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | | | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | | XC6 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC6 | | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> | XC6 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> All the results are as expected. Please note that --with-xcode-path overrides DEVELOPER_DIR, since that could be set in the environment. >> >> (yeah, I went a little OCD on this...) >> >> -DrD- >> > From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Wed Jan 14 21:04:10 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 14:04:10 -0700 Subject: jdk8u60-b01: HotSpot Message-ID: <54B6D9CA.2000104@oracle.com> hs25.60-b01 has been integrated into jdk8u60-b01. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/rev/c98ebe8e91ac http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/corba/rev/0ea69ff98c84 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/6fe56d3026d5 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxp/rev/8beb27f2f1bb http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxws/rev/dd25f8e8c6ab http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/c06b6d58e6a9 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/langtools/rev/7845808098ea http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/nashorn/rev/59e4cf23697e Component : VM Status : 0 major failures, 1 minor failures Date : 01/14/2015 at 14:00 MSK Tested By : STT_VM Cost(total man-days): 1 Workspace : 2015-01-08-203811.amurillo.hs25-60-b01-snapshot Bundles : 2015-01-08-203811.amurillo.hs25-60-b01-snapshot Platforms : Others Tests : Log : link Browsers : NA Patches : NA Number of Tests Executed : 360826 passed tests, 3324 failed tests (1 new failures) Bug verification status: ====================================== Tested, Pass: Tested, Pass (partial fixes): Tested, Fail: Untested bug fixes: 8035663: Suspicious failure of test java/util/concurrent/Phaser/FickleRegister.java 8037968: Add tests on alignment of objects copied to survivor space 8039995: Test serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java fails on some Linux/Mac machines. 8058345: Refactor native stack printing from vmError.cpp to debug.cpp to make it available in gdb as well 8058935: CPU detection gives 0 cores per cpu, 2 threads per core in Amazon EC2 environment 8061785: [TEST_BUG] serviceability/sa/jmap-hashcode/Test8028623.java has utf8 character corrupted by earlier merge 8065915: Fix includes after 8058148: MaxNodeLimit and LiveNodeCountInliningCutoff 8066143: [TESTBUG] New tests in gc/survivorAlignment/ fails 8067802: Update the Hotspot version numbers in Hotspot for JDK 8u60 New bugs filed: Bugs in PIT build: JDK-8068892 KS's ResourceManagement module fails due to inconsistent statistics Bugs in earlier promoted build: Number of PIT requested: 1 Integration target J2SE build number: jdk8u60-b01 Issues and Notes: This is PIT for HS25.60-b01 for jdk8u60-b01. Go for integration. -- Alejandro From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Jan 15 05:58:25 2015 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:58:25 +1000 Subject: [8u60] RFR: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: References: <39719ED3-1F4E-4E6C-AA9F-A3C4766537B4@oracle.com> <54B3A38C.10909@oracle.com> <8B01B84D-5B6F-478E-ABF1-33F5ADE2F826@oracle.com> <08C63261-D594-404E-892B-BDE2898B505A@oracle.com> <4DC9B291-D302-428C-A5F7-177066C65991@oracle.com> <54B629D8.8070700@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B75701.1080507@oracle.com> On 15/01/2015 6:23 AM, David DeHaven wrote: > > Can someone from hotspot-dev please look at the hotspot changes? Looks okay to me. Thanks, David H. > -DrD- > >> Hello, >> >> This looks good to me. Thanks for the detailed table! >> >> /Erik >> >> On 2015-01-14 04:09, David DeHaven wrote: >>>>> The --with-xcode-path argument is optional, you should also be able to build with Xcode 4 selected via "sudo xcode-select -switch /path/to/Xcode4.app". I leave MAS managed Xcode (currently 6) active as I'm constantly bouncing between projects and it's a hassle to have to remember to reset the active toolchain, so I thought it best to allow configure to be provided a path. >>>> Ugh. I broke something along the way, this doesn't *quite* work. >>>> >>>> xcrun complains with "xcrun: error: missing DEVELOPER_DIR path:" >>>> >>>> I think I'm exporting an empty DEVELOPER_DIR. I shall fix and update. >>> TL;DR: Please review round 2: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/ >>> >>> (I removed generated-configure.sh to reduce the review size, it will be re-generated prior to pushing) >>> >>> >>> I've tested the following configuration scenarios (output from a shell script I cobbled together..) >>> >>> field values: >>> XC6 - Xcode 6 installed in /Applications/Xcode.app >>> XC4 - Xcode 4 installed in some other dir >>> (empty) - Argument not passed to configure >>> >>> Result meanings: >>> DEV_DIR set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was properly exported in spec.gmk >>> DEV_DIR NOT set - configure succeeded, DEVELOPER_DIR was not needed (XC4 must be selected to achieve this) >>> Configure failed - Configure properly failed when it detected Xcode > 4 >>> >>> "Selected" Xcode means version reported by xcode-select -p >>> >>> >>> | Xcode selected | --with-xcode-path | DEVELOPER_DIR | result | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | | | DEV_DIR NOT set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | | XC6 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC6 | | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC4 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | | | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | | XC6 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC4 | | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC4 | XC4 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC4 | XC6 | DEV_DIR set | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC6 | | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC6 | XC4 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> | XC6 | XC6 | XC6 | Configure failed | >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> All the results are as expected. Please note that --with-xcode-path overrides DEVELOPER_DIR, since that could be set in the environment. >>> >>> (yeah, I went a little OCD on this...) >>> >>> -DrD- >>> >> > From doko at ubuntu.com Thu Jan 15 07:51:08 2015 From: doko at ubuntu.com (Matthias Klose) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:51:08 +0100 Subject: jdk8u40-b20 and jdk8u40-b21 not accessible, jdk8u40-b21 is accessible Message-ID: <54B7716C.1000304@ubuntu.com> The last tag available via zip or tar downloads is jdk8u40-b19, downloads for newer versions don't work. I didn't check any other archives. Could this be fixed? Thanks, Matthias wget http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/archive/jdk8u40-b21.tar.bz2 --2015-01-15 08:47:11-- http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/archive/jdk8u40-b21.tar.bz2 Resolving hg.openjdk.java.net (hg.openjdk.java.net)... 137.254.56.63 Connecting to hg.openjdk.java.net (hg.openjdk.java.net)|137.254.56.63|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found 2015-01-15 08:47:11 ERROR 404: Not Found. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 15 09:37:22 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 09:37:22 +0000 Subject: jdk8u40-b20 and jdk8u40-b21 not accessible, jdk8u40-b21 is accessible In-Reply-To: <54B7716C.1000304@ubuntu.com> References: <54B7716C.1000304@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: <54B78A52.5000505@oracle.com> Matthias, A stabilization forest for 8u40 was created after b19. Builds after that came from : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40 The new build tags reside in the above forest. They will be sync'ed up to jdk8u forest before 8u40 ships. regards, Sean. On 15/01/2015 07:51, Matthias Klose wrote: > The last tag available via zip or tar downloads is jdk8u40-b19, downloads for > newer versions don't work. I didn't check any other archives. Could this be fixed? > > Thanks, Matthias > > wget http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/archive/jdk8u40-b21.tar.bz2 > > --2015-01-15 08:47:11-- > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/archive/jdk8u40-b21.tar.bz2 > Resolving hg.openjdk.java.net (hg.openjdk.java.net)... 137.254.56.63 > Connecting to hg.openjdk.java.net (hg.openjdk.java.net)|137.254.56.63|:80... > connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found > 2015-01-15 08:47:11 ERROR 404: Not Found. > From sergey.bylokhov at oracle.com Thu Jan 15 18:40:06 2015 From: sergey.bylokhov at oracle.com (Sergey Bylokhov) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 10:40:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8065373 [macosx] jdk8, jdk7u60 Regression in Graphics2D drawing of derived Fonts Message-ID: <72db8b83-5428-4699-9cad-48ef1cc21d4b@default> Hello, This is a direct back port from jdk 9 to jdk8u-dev. 8065373: [macosx] jdk8, jdk7u60 Regression in Graphics2D drawing of derived Fonts Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065373 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8065373/webrev.00 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/5d13458da243 Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2014-December/004972.html Reviewers: Phil Race, Andrew Brygin -- Best regards, Sergey. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 15 19:03:54 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 19:03:54 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8065373 [macosx] jdk8, jdk7u60 Regression in Graphics2D drawing of derived Fonts In-Reply-To: <72db8b83-5428-4699-9cad-48ef1cc21d4b@default> References: <72db8b83-5428-4699-9cad-48ef1cc21d4b@default> Message-ID: <54B80F1A.10100@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 15/01/2015 18:40, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: > Hello, > This is a direct back port from jdk 9 to jdk8u-dev. > > 8065373: [macosx] jdk8, jdk7u60 Regression in Graphics2D drawing of derived Fonts > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065373 > Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8065373/webrev.00 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/5d13458da243 > Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2014-December/004972.html > Reviewers: Phil Race, Andrew Brygin > From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 04:13:44 2015 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (A. Sundararajan) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:43:44 +0530 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068985: Wrong 'this' bound to eval call within a function when caller's 'this' is a Java object Message-ID: <54B88FF8.1050604@oracle.com> Please approve. bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068985 jdk8u-dev webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068985/8u60/webrev.00/ jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004103.html Thanks -Sundar From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 09:24:54 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 09:24:54 +0000 Subject: [8u60] approval request for 8068985: Wrong 'this' bound to eval call within a function when caller's 'this' is a Java object In-Reply-To: <54B88FF8.1050604@oracle.com> References: <54B88FF8.1050604@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B8D8E6.4050508@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 16/01/2015 04:13, A. Sundararajan wrote: > Please approve. > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068985 > jdk8u-dev webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8068985/8u60/webrev.00/ > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004103.html > > Thanks > -Sundar From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 12:39:22 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:39:22 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068573: POJO setter using [] syntax throws an exception Message-ID: Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068573 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068573/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004095.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. This changeset is actually incomplete, as I forgot to add a test file into it; this is fixed by the follow-up JDK-8068994 that is also requested for approval. The two will be pushed together. Thanks, Attila. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 12:39:24 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:39:24 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068994: Forgot to add a test model to JDK-8068573 Message-ID: <476E7DDF-A2D9-4B3C-8B50-6BF2BF61B919@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068994 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068994/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004098.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 13:41:02 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:41:02 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068573: POJO setter using [] syntax throws an exception In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54B914EE.30709@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 16/01/15 12:39, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068573 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068573/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004095.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. This changeset is actually incomplete, as I forgot to add a test file into it; this is fixed by the follow-up JDK-8068994 that is also requested for approval. The two will be pushed together. > > Thanks, > Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 13:41:24 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 13:41:24 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068994: Forgot to add a test model to JDK-8068573 In-Reply-To: <476E7DDF-A2D9-4B3C-8B50-6BF2BF61B919@oracle.com> References: <476E7DDF-A2D9-4B3C-8B50-6BF2BF61B919@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B91504.8020003@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 16/01/15 12:39, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068994 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068994/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004098.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From alexander.zvegintsev at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 14:49:48 2015 From: alexander.zvegintsev at oracle.com (Alexander Zvegintsev) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 17:49:48 +0300 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval 8061636: Fix for JDK-7079254 changes behavior of MouseListener, MouseMotionListener Message-ID: <54B9250C.9050701@oracle.com> Hello, This is a request for approval to backport a fix from the jdk9 to the jdk8u-dev repository. Changes applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061636 The fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/bffcfcd43910 The review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008857.html -- Thanks, Alexander. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 14:58:36 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 14:58:36 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval 8061636: Fix for JDK-7079254 changes behavior of MouseListener, MouseMotionListener In-Reply-To: <54B9250C.9050701@oracle.com> References: <54B9250C.9050701@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54B9271C.8060403@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 16/01/15 14:49, Alexander Zvegintsev wrote: > Hello, > > This is a request for approval to backport a fix from the jdk9 to the > jdk8u-dev repository. > Changes applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. > > The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061636 > The fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/bffcfcd43910 > The review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008857.html > From david.dehaven at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 18:48:56 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 10:48:56 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework Message-ID: <304F9F62-CD1B-4790-A37E-B148A1B451EA@oracle.com> JBS Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 Changesets to be pushed (webrev): http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/top http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/hotspot http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/jdk (generated-configure.sh will be regenerated prior to pushing...) Reviewed-by: erikj, dholmes (hotspot) Since this includes hotspot changes and is not time critical I'll be pushing the whole batch through hs-dev. -DrD- From lana.steuck at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 19:48:02 2015 From: lana.steuck at oracle.com (lana.steuck at oracle.com) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 11:48:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: jdk8u-b22: jdk8u40-dev Message-ID: <201501161948.t0GJm2xn021067@jano-app.us.oracle.com> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/rev/d8a715bb7aad http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/nashorn/rev/c822b6dd240c http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/langtools/rev/a5eb8f677bd4 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jdk/rev/a2c227da59b4 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxws/rev/2347777c9ddd http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxp/rev/a70de7036c2c http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/hotspot/rev/3bea2cc4c941 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/corba/rev/2f84286c4ce5 --- All the fixes will be tested during promotion (no PIT testing at this point): List of all fixes: =================== JDK-8068485 infrastructure Update references of download.oracle.com to docs.oracle.com in javadoc JDK-8068491 infrastructure Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. JDK-8068495 tools Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in lang From lev.priima at oracle.com Fri Jan 16 21:46:10 2015 From: lev.priima at oracle.com (Lev Priima) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 00:46:10 +0300 Subject: Request for Approval: 8068795: Missing trailing blank in a HttpServer response leads to client crashes Message-ID: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> Please approve and push backport: jdk8u-dev changeset: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lpriima/8068795/8u/webrev.00/ bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068795 jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030843.html Testing against 8u-dev tip: $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/sun/net/ Test results: passed: 103 $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/com/sun/net/ Test results: passed: 43 -- Best Regards, Lev From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Sat Jan 17 02:19:03 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 19:19:03 -0700 Subject: [8u40] RDP2 Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.40-b25 Message-ID: <54B9C697.1030403@oracle.com> Requesting approval to integrate hs25.40-b25 into jdk8u40-b22. A webrev is available at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u40/hs25.40-b25-jdk8u40-b22.webrev/ Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit 8069209: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b25 -- Alejandro From sean.coffey at oracle.com Sun Jan 18 18:32:43 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 18:32:43 +0000 Subject: [8u40] RDP2 Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.40-b25 In-Reply-To: <54B9C697.1030403@oracle.com> References: <54B9C697.1030403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BBFC4B.2070002@oracle.com> Approved pending positive PIT results. regards, Sean. On 17/01/2015 02:19, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > Requesting approval to integrate hs25.40-b25 into jdk8u40-b22. > > A webrev is available at: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u40/hs25.40-b25-jdk8u40-b22.webrev/ > > Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed > only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. > > The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone > nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. > > 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge > SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit > 8069209: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b25 > From maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com Mon Jan 19 15:21:30 2015 From: maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com (Maurizio Cimadamore) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 15:21:30 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Review: JDK-8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 Message-ID: <54BD20FA.50806@oracle.com> Please review the proposed fix for the bug in the subject. Details below: JDK8 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ This patch fixes an issue with variables named 'enum' being incorrectly parsed (with source < 5). Thanks, Maurizio From neugens at redhat.com Mon Jan 19 15:38:54 2015 From: neugens at redhat.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:38:54 +0100 Subject: Request for Approval: 8069290 Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis Message-ID: <1421681934.4075.7.camel@galactica.localdomain> Hello all, I would like to push the following patch in JDK8u: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8069290/webrev.00/ This is a fix for: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069290 And is a direct backport from the jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067364 The only change are the paths which obviously are different due to jdk9 structure refactoring, the rest of the patch is unchanged. Btw, the diff is taken against: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40-dev/jdk I'm not sure if this is the right repository for the push? Cheers, Mario From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 19 16:08:32 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:08:32 +0000 Subject: Request for Approval: 8069290 Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis In-Reply-To: <1421681934.4075.7.camel@galactica.localdomain> References: <1421681934.4075.7.camel@galactica.localdomain> Message-ID: <54BD2C00.7000805@oracle.com> Mario, Looks like you created the backport record incorrectly for this port. Backports must be created from within the master bug itself (JDK-8067364) - See : https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/general/JBS+Overview#JBSOverview-multireleasetracking From JDK-8067364, simply go to More Actions -> Create Backport - that'll link the parent and backport up automatically. I suggest you close JDK-8069290 since Bug records can't be converted to Backport records. Please re-submit your request for record purposes then. Note that we always use the master bug ID for reference purposes (changeset bug ID, commit message, approval request..)- use 8067364 everywhere! regards, Sean. On 19/01/15 15:38, Mario Torre wrote: > Hello all, > > I would like to push the following patch in JDK8u: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8069290/webrev.00/ > > This is a fix for: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069290 > > And is a direct backport from the jdk9 bug: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067364 > > The only change are the paths which obviously are different due to jdk9 > structure refactoring, the rest of the patch is unchanged. > > Btw, the diff is taken against: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40-dev/jdk > > I'm not sure if this is the right repository for the push? > > Cheers, > Mario > > From neugens at redhat.com Mon Jan 19 16:24:24 2015 From: neugens at redhat.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:24:24 +0100 Subject: Request for Approval: 8069290 Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis In-Reply-To: <54BD2C00.7000805@oracle.com> References: <1421681934.4075.7.camel@galactica.localdomain> <54BD2C00.7000805@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1421684664.4075.9.camel@galactica.localdomain> On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 16:08 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Mario, > > Looks like you created the backport record incorrectly for this port. > Backports must be created from within the master bug itself > (JDK-8067364) - See : > https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/general/JBS+Overview#JBSOverview-multireleasetracking > From JDK-8067364, simply go to More Actions -> Create Backport - > that'll link the parent and backport up automatically. > > I suggest you close JDK-8069290 since Bug records can't be converted to > Backport records. Please re-submit your request for record purposes > then. Note that we always use the master bug ID for reference purposes > (changeset bug ID, commit message, approval request..)- use 8067364 > everywhere! > > regards, > Sean. Hi Sean, Ok, I created the backport (was assigned JDK-8067364) and closed the 8069290 (marked as duplicate, I hope this was the right thing). I'll send a new mail now with the backport request. Thanks, Mario From neugens at redhat.com Mon Jan 19 16:28:50 2015 From: neugens at redhat.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:28:50 +0100 Subject: Request for Approval: 8067364 Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis Message-ID: <1421684930.4075.12.camel@galactica.localdomain> Hello all, I would like to push the following patch in JDK8u: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8067364_backport/webrev.00/ This is a direct backport of the bug originally at: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067364 The only change are the paths which obviously are different due to jdk9 structure refactoring, the rest of the patch is unchanged. Btw, the diff is taken against: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40-dev/jdk I'm not sure if this is the right repository for the push? Cheers, Mario From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 19 16:33:03 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:33:03 +0000 Subject: Request for Approval: 8067364 Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis In-Reply-To: <1421684930.4075.12.camel@galactica.localdomain> References: <1421684930.4075.12.camel@galactica.localdomain> Message-ID: <54BD31BF.7060409@oracle.com> Thanks for fixing up the bug records Mario. jdk8u40-dev is a stabilization forest for critical-approved fixes only. See : http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html You need to use the http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev forest for your push. Approved for jdk8u-dev! regards, Sean. On 19/01/15 16:28, Mario Torre wrote: > Hello all, > > I would like to push the following patch in JDK8u: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8067364_backport/webrev.00/ > > This is a direct backport of the bug originally at: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067364 > > The only change are the paths which obviously are different due to jdk9 > structure refactoring, the rest of the patch is unchanged. > > Btw, the diff is taken against: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40-dev/jdk > > I'm not sure if this is the right repository for the push? > > Cheers, > Mario > > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 11:21:56 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:21:56 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8067880: Dead typed push methods in ArrayData Message-ID: Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067880 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8067880/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004113.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 11:34:50 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:34:50 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068603: ScriptObjectMirror should reject null/empty string/non-string parameters in Bindings methods Message-ID: Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068603 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068603/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004116.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 11:40:41 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:40:41 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8067880: Dead typed push methods in ArrayData In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54BE3EB9.1030005@oracle.com> Approved. Please add a suitable noreg- label. regards, Sean. On 20/01/2015 11:21, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067880 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8067880/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004113.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 13:46:09 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:46:09 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8068603: ScriptObjectMirror should reject null/empty string/non-string parameters in Bindings methods In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54BE5C21.3080008@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 20/01/15 11:34, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068603 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8068603/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004116.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From jan.lahoda at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 15:16:35 2015 From: jan.lahoda at oracle.com (Jan Lahoda) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 16:16:35 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Review: JDK-8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 In-Reply-To: <54BD20FA.50806@oracle.com> References: <54BD20FA.50806@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE7153.2020305@oracle.com> Looks good to me - not an 8u Reviewer, though. Jan On 19.1.2015 16:21, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > Please review the proposed fix for the bug in the subject. Details below: > > JDK8 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ > > This patch fixes an issue with variables named 'enum' being incorrectly > parsed (with source < 5). > > Thanks, > Maurizio > From lev.priima at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 15:23:15 2015 From: lev.priima at oracle.com (Lev Priima) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 18:23:15 +0300 Subject: Request for Approval: 8068795: Missing trailing blank in a HttpServer response leads to client crashes In-Reply-To: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> Please approve and push backport: > jdk8u-dev changeset: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lpriima/8068795/8u/webrev.00/ Original patch http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4fa8d83cfa5e can be smoothly applied to repo http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk by command: jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg diff --git -r 32e5cb13a06b -r 4fa8d83cfa5e) | bash ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - --no-commit > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068795 > jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030843.html > Testing against 8u-dev tip: > $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/sun/net/ > Test results: passed: 103 > $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/com/sun/net/ > Test results: passed: 43 > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 15:48:52 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:48:52 +0000 Subject: Request for Approval: 8068795: Missing trailing blank in a HttpServer response leads to client crashes In-Reply-To: <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> Approved. I can push this to jdk8u-dev. regards, Sean. On 20/01/2015 15:23, Lev Priima wrote: > Please approve and push backport: >> jdk8u-dev changeset: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lpriima/8068795/8u/webrev.00/ > Original patch > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4fa8d83cfa5e can be > smoothly applied to repo > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk by command: > > jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg diff --git > -r 32e5cb13a06b -r 4fa8d83cfa5e) | bash > ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - > --no-commit >> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068795 >> jdk9 review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030843.html >> Testing against 8u-dev tip: >> $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/sun/net/ >> Test results: passed: 103 >> $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/com/sun/net/ >> Test results: passed: 43 >> > From joel.franck at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 16:22:03 2015 From: joel.franck at oracle.com (=?utf-8?Q?Joel_Borggr=C3=A9n-Franck?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:22:03 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Review: JDK-8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 In-Reply-To: <54BD20FA.50806@oracle.com> References: <54BD20FA.50806@oracle.com> Message-ID: <138E343B-8F72-4E6B-AC10-5D345791905B@oracle.com> Looks good. cheers /Joel > On 19 Jan 2015, at 16:21, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > > Please review the proposed fix for the bug in the subject. Details below: > > JDK8 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ > > This patch fixes an issue with variables named 'enum' being incorrectly parsed (with source < 5). > > Thanks, > Maurizio > From anton.nashatyrev at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 16:36:32 2015 From: anton.nashatyrev at oracle.com (Anton Nashatyrev) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 19:36:32 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Backport request: 8068283: Mac OS Incompatibility between JDK 6 and 8 regarding input method handling Message-ID: <54BE8410.2050408@oracle.com> Hello, please approve the fix backport from jdk9 to jdk8u-dev. The patch was applied without any modifications except source path. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068283 Jdk9 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eanashaty/8068283/9/webrev.00/ Jdk9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/9a404ab76bb0 Discussion and Review Threads: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2014-December/008761.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008868.html Thanks! Anton. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 16:39:35 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 16:39:35 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Backport request: 8068283: Mac OS Incompatibility between JDK 6 and 8 regarding input method handling In-Reply-To: <54BE8410.2050408@oracle.com> References: <54BE8410.2050408@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE84C7.3080502@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 20/01/2015 16:36, Anton Nashatyrev wrote: > Hello, > > please approve the fix backport from jdk9 to jdk8u-dev. The patch > was applied without any modifications except source path. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068283 > Jdk9 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eanashaty/8068283/9/webrev.00/ > Jdk9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/9a404ab76bb0 > Discussion and Review Threads: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2014-December/008761.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008868.html > > Thanks! > Anton. From david.dehaven at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 17:22:55 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 09:22:55 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <304F9F62-CD1B-4790-A37E-B148A1B451EA@oracle.com> References: <304F9F62-CD1B-4790-A37E-B148A1B451EA@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BAFF10-D13D-49DF-BDC1-70AE2895CA10@oracle.com> Ping? Anyone? > > JBS Issue: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 > > Changesets to be pushed (webrev): > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/top > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/hotspot > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/jdk > > (generated-configure.sh will be regenerated prior to pushing...) > > Reviewed-by: erikj, dholmes (hotspot) > > Since this includes hotspot changes and is not time critical I'll be pushing the whole batch through hs-dev. > > -DrD- > From lev.priima at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 18:11:16 2015 From: lev.priima at oracle.com (Lev Priima) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 21:11:16 +0300 Subject: Request for Approval: 8068795: Missing trailing blank in a HttpServer response leads to client crashes In-Reply-To: <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE9A44.3040307@oracle.com> Thanks Se?n, Lev On 01/20/2015 06:48 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved. I can push this to jdk8u-dev. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 20/01/2015 15:23, Lev Priima wrote: >> Please approve and push backport: >>> jdk8u-dev changeset: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lpriima/8068795/8u/webrev.00/ >> Original patch >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4fa8d83cfa5e can be >> smoothly applied to repo >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk by command: >> >> jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg diff --git >> -r 32e5cb13a06b -r 4fa8d83cfa5e) | bash >> ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - >> --no-commit >>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068795 >>> jdk9 review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030843.html >>> Testing against 8u-dev tip: >>> $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/sun/net/ >>> Test results: passed: 103 >>> $ jtreg -nr -jdk:8u jdk8u-dev/jdk/test/com/sun/net/ >>> Test results: passed: 43 >>> >> > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 18:14:07 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 18:14:07 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <54BAFF10-D13D-49DF-BDC1-70AE2895CA10@oracle.com> References: <304F9F62-CD1B-4790-A37E-B148A1B451EA@oracle.com> <54BAFF10-D13D-49DF-BDC1-70AE2895CA10@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BE9AEF.9090205@oracle.com> Approved. Sorry, missed that one. -Rob On 20/01/15 17:22, David DeHaven wrote: > Ping? Anyone? > >> JBS Issue: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 >> >> Changesets to be pushed (webrev): >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/top >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/hotspot >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/jdk >> >> (generated-configure.sh will be regenerated prior to pushing...) >> >> Reviewed-by: erikj, dholmes (hotspot) >> >> Since this includes hotspot changes and is not time critical I'll be pushing the whole batch through hs-dev. >> >> -DrD- >> From david.dehaven at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 19:20:42 2015 From: david.dehaven at oracle.com (David DeHaven) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:20:42 -0800 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework In-Reply-To: <54BE9AEF.9090205@oracle.com> References: <304F9F62-CD1B-4790-A37E-B148A1B451EA@oracle.com> <54BAFF10-D13D-49DF-BDC1-70AE2895CA10@oracle.com> <54BE9AEF.9090205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <9B0FA6C6-33EF-44ED-950B-CCF87FAAD8D1@oracle.com> Thanks :) -DrD- > Approved. Sorry, missed that one. > > -Rob > > On 20/01/15 17:22, David DeHaven wrote: >> Ping? Anyone? >> >>> JBS Issue: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043340 >>> >>> Changesets to be pushed (webrev): >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/top >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/hotspot >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ddehaven/8043340/jdk8u/v1/jdk >>> >>> (generated-configure.sh will be regenerated prior to pushing...) >>> >>> Reviewed-by: erikj, dholmes (hotspot) >>> >>> Since this includes hotspot changes and is not time critical I'll be pushing the whole batch through hs-dev. >>> >>> -DrD- >>> > From abhi.saha at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 21:19:27 2015 From: abhi.saha at oracle.com (Abhijit Saha) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 13:19:27 -0800 Subject: [8u40] Request for approval for bulk changes from Jan 2015 CPU fixes into 8u40 Message-ID: <54BEC65F.8030807@oracle.com> 8u31 was released earlier today [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the changes into the jdk8u40 forest. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u31-8u40.sync/ Thanks Abhijit [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html -- Lead, Java SE Updates Java Platform Group Oracle Corporation. (408)276-7564 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 21:20:34 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 21:20:34 +0000 Subject: [8u40] Request for approval for bulk changes from Jan 2015 CPU fixes into 8u40 In-Reply-To: <54BEC65F.8030807@oracle.com> References: <54BEC65F.8030807@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BEC6A2.3050009@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 20/01/15 21:19, Abhijit Saha wrote: > 8u31 was released earlier today [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the > changes into the jdk8u40 forest. > > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u31-8u40.sync/ > > > Thanks > Abhijit > > > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html > > From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 21:55:27 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:55:27 -0700 Subject: jdk8u40-b22: HotSpot Message-ID: <54BECECF.5090701@oracle.com> hs25.40-b25 has been integrated into jdk8u40-b22. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/rev/b6d03a810a61 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/corba/rev/4c7421f74674 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/hotspot/rev/0ee548a1cda0 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxp/rev/54a13451ce24 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxws/rev/6e928fd91525 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jdk/rev/d168113f9841 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/langtools/rev/79177246b3db http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/nashorn/rev/f9f70a0f60f4 Component : VM Status : 0 major failures, 0 minor failure Date : 01/20/2014 at 17:00 MSK Tested By : STT_VM Cost(total man-days): 1 Workspace : 2015-01-17-001606.amurillo.8u40-8u31-hs-dev Bundles : 2015-01-17-001606.amurillo.8u40-8u31-hs-dev Platforms : Others Tests : Log : link Browsers : NA Patches : NA Number of Tests Executed : 370209 passed tests, 3423 failed tests (no new failures) Bug verification status: ====================================== Tested, Pass: Tested, Pass (partial fixes): Tested, Fail: Untested bug fixes: 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit 8069209: new hotspot build - hs25.40-b25 New bugs filed: Bugs in PIT build: Bugs in earlier promoted build: 8069263: assert(fm == NULL || fm->method_holder() == _participants[n]) failed: sanity Number of PIT requested: 1 Integration target J2SE build number: jdk8u40-b22 Issues and Notes: This is PIT for HS25.40-b25 for jdk8u40-b22. Go for integration. -- Alejandro From vicente.romero at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 22:20:06 2015 From: vicente.romero at oracle.com (Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 14:20:06 -0800 Subject: [8udev] Request for approval for backport of JDK-8064857: javac generates LVT entry with length 0 for local variable Message-ID: <54BED496.6000506@oracle.com> Hi, Please approve the backport of JDK-8064857 from 9 to 8udev repo. JDK9 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8064857 JDK8 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068546 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/langtools/rev/3bdbc3b8aa14 The code applies cleanly, except for the paths differences due to modules in 9. Thanks, Vicente From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 20 22:27:43 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 22:27:43 +0000 Subject: [8udev] Request for approval for backport of JDK-8064857: javac generates LVT entry with length 0 for local variable In-Reply-To: <54BED496.6000506@oracle.com> References: <54BED496.6000506@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BED65F.2020500@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 20/01/2015 22:20, Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve the backport of JDK-8064857 from 9 to 8udev repo. > > JDK9 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8064857 > JDK8 bug entry: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068546 > changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/langtools/rev/3bdbc3b8aa14 > > The code applies cleanly, except for the paths differences due to > modules in 9. > > Thanks, > Vicente From maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 00:06:10 2015 From: maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com (Maurizio Cimadamore) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 00:06:10 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 Message-ID: <54BEED72.1000900@oracle.com> Please approve the following fix for 8u60: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 The changes to be pushed are available at the webrev given below: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ The public review thread is available here: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002890.html Maurizio From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 09:21:02 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:21:02 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 In-Reply-To: <54BEED72.1000900@oracle.com> References: <54BEED72.1000900@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BF6F7E.3020800@oracle.com> Maurizio, Please add 9-na to the bug report. Approved. regards, Sean. On 21/01/2015 00:06, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > Please approve the following fix for 8u60: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 > > The changes to be pushed are available at the webrev given below: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ > > The public review thread is available here: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002890.html > > > Maurizio From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 09:32:12 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:32:12 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8062170: java.security.ProviderException: Error parsing configuration with space Message-ID: <54BF721C.6050605@oracle.com> Hi! Would you please approve backporting this fix? Unshuffled patch applies cleanly. It was suggested to combine this with the port of JDK-7196009 back to 7u, so we need to first bring it into 8u. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062170 Jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/08705750a204 Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011489.html Sincerely yours, Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 09:39:17 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 09:39:17 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8062170: java.security.ProviderException: Error parsing configuration with space In-Reply-To: <54BF721C.6050605@oracle.com> References: <54BF721C.6050605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BF73C5.805@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 21/01/2015 09:32, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hi! > > Would you please approve backporting this fix? > Unshuffled patch applies cleanly. > > It was suggested to combine this with the port of JDK-7196009 back to > 7u, so we need to first bring it into 8u. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062170 > Jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/08705750a204 > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011489.html > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan From paul.sandoz at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 10:34:55 2015 From: paul.sandoz at oracle.com (Paul Sandoz) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:34:55 +0000 Subject: [8u60] 8068432: Inconsistent exception handling in CompletableFuture.thenCompose Message-ID: <122836A8-B7A0-4E17-BB4D-D72D0B8B9C8B@oracle.com> Hi, I would like to back-port a fix from 9 to 8u60. The webrev/changeset applies cleanly: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8068432-CompletableFuture-thenCompose-Exception/webrev/ http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/11142ab6e13f The review was here: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030870.html Thanks, Paul. From paul.sandoz at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 10:35:16 2015 From: paul.sandoz at oracle.com (Paul Sandoz) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:35:16 +0000 Subject: [8u60] RFR 8069302 Deprecate Unsafe monitor methods in JDK 8u release Message-ID: <7BA76D88-2443-4DF2-AC64-439FF0911CDA@oracle.com> Hi, The Unsafe monitor methods monitorEnter. monitorExit and tryMonitorEnter were removed from JDK 9 [1]. I would like to mark those methods as deprecated in 8u60. I doubt no one will notice :-) but it's the correct thing to do. Paul. [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/0a0a0986400e From maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 10:43:37 2015 From: maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com (Maurizio Cimadamore) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:43:37 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for CR 8069181: java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 In-Reply-To: <54BF6F7E.3020800@oracle.com> References: <54BEED72.1000900@oracle.com> <54BF6F7E.3020800@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BF82D9.5090209@oracle.com> On 21/01/15 09:21, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Maurizio, > > Please add 9-na to the bug report. Approved. Added - and pushed. Thanks! > > regards, > Sean. > > On 21/01/2015 00:06, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: >> Please approve the following fix for 8u60: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069181 >> >> The changes to be pushed are available at the webrev given below: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/webrev/ >> >> The public review thread is available here: >> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002890.html >> >> >> >> Maurizio > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 10:47:40 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:47:40 +0000 Subject: [8u60] 8068432: Inconsistent exception handling in CompletableFuture.thenCompose In-Reply-To: <122836A8-B7A0-4E17-BB4D-D72D0B8B9C8B@oracle.com> References: <122836A8-B7A0-4E17-BB4D-D72D0B8B9C8B@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BF83CC.1050405@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 21/01/15 10:34, Paul Sandoz wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to back-port a fix from 9 to 8u60. > > The webrev/changeset applies cleanly: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8068432-CompletableFuture-thenCompose-Exception/webrev/ > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/11142ab6e13f > > The review was here: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030870.html > > Thanks, > Paul. From volker.simonis at gmail.com Wed Jan 21 10:47:12 2015 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:47:12 +0100 Subject: How to push security fixes for non-Oracle platforms after CPU fixes? Message-ID: Hi, today, after the release of 8u31 you've pushed the corresponding security fixes to jdk8u40 (see http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002910.html). We have a change which fixes "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" on AIX. We had already send this fix to Oracle trough our licensee channel, however if was too late to get it into the 8u31. Therefore it's now missing from 8u40. What's the best way of getting this as fast as possible into 8u40 and the other 8u repos (8udev, 8u60). As far as I know, changes usually flow from jdk9/dev -> jdk8u/dev -> jdk8u/jdk8u40. But in this case it's different, because 8050807 hasn't yet been pushed to jdk9. Can I just send a RFR to the jdk8u-dev list and push it right to 8u40 myself once I get the approval? It's a hotspot change, but it's already reviewed, I'm a jdk8u committer and the change only touches aix-specific files? Thank you and best regards, Volker From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 15:29:51 2015 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 18:29:51 +0300 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: JDK-8067344: Adjust java/lang/invoke/LFCaching/LFGarbageCollectedTest.java for recent changes in java.lang.invoke Message-ID: <54BFC5EF.6000708@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the direct backport of the test bug fix to 8u60 The webrev is slightly different from that for JDK 9, but only in line numbers, all the rest is just the same. The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067344 The 8u60 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8067344_8u/webrev.00/ JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/75c351a01d3c Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-December/030452.html Thanks -Konstantin From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 17:11:56 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 17:11:56 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net Message-ID: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> Hi please oblige and review the following changes http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ which address the issue https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c regards Mark From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 17:33:08 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 17:33:08 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> Hi Mark, does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? While we're here, what about line 230 in src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? regards, Sean. On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi > please oblige and review the following changes > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ > which address the issue > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 > > CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in > src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c > src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c > > regards > Mark > > > > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 18:10:11 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 18:10:11 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54BFEB83.9070109@oracle.com> Thanks Sean, good spot all round, will make the suggestion amendments regards Mark On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Hi Mark, > > does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? > While we're here, what about line 230 in > src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? > > For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call > cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? > > regards, > Sean. > > On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> Hi >> please oblige and review the following changes >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >> which address the issue >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >> >> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >> >> regards >> Mark >> >> >> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 19:05:48 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 19:05:48 +0000 Subject: Sync up of 8u40 and 8u60 forests Message-ID: <54BFF88C.4040308@oracle.com> Sync up of jdk8u40 -> jdk8u (& jdk8u-dev) is complete. 8u40 contained the 8u31 fixes which are now also present in the 8u60 forests. regards, Sean. From john.r.rose at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 19:43:55 2015 From: john.r.rose at oracle.com (John Rose) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 11:43:55 -0800 Subject: [8u60] RFR 8069302 Deprecate Unsafe monitor methods in JDK 8u release In-Reply-To: <7BA76D88-2443-4DF2-AC64-439FF0911CDA@oracle.com> References: <7BA76D88-2443-4DF2-AC64-439FF0911CDA@oracle.com> Message-ID: <48C8A30A-6393-4D6F-8ED6-E767AC93FFF8@oracle.com> +1; do it. > On Jan 21, 2015, at 2:35 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: > > Hi, > > The Unsafe monitor methods monitorEnter. monitorExit and tryMonitorEnter were removed from JDK 9 [1]. > > I would like to mark those methods as deprecated in 8u60. I doubt no one will notice :-) but it's the correct thing to do. > > Paul. > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/0a0a0986400e From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 21:11:09 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:11:09 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> update webrev with suggested amendments http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ regards Mark On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Hi Mark, > > does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? > While we're here, what about line 230 in > src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? > > For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call > cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? > > regards, > Sean. > > On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> Hi >> please oblige and review the following changes >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >> which address the issue >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >> >> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >> >> regards >> Mark >> >> >> >> > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 21:36:52 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:36:52 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8037909 - JNI warnings in jdk/src/windows/native/java/nio/MappedByteBuffer.c Message-ID: <54C01BF4.3000202@oracle.com> Hi please oblige and approve the following change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051481/webrev/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051481 which is a backport of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8037909 null return checks added to JNI calls in src/windows/native/java/nio/MappedByteBuffer.c review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029592.html regards Mark From chris.hegarty at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 21:42:12 2015 From: chris.hegarty at oracle.com (Chris Hegarty) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:42:12 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> Message-ID: <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> > On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: > > update webrev with suggested amendments > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ Looks good Mark. -Chris. > regards > Mark > >> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >> While we're here, what about line 230 in src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >> >> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>> Hi >>> please oblige and review the following changes >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>> which address the issue >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>> >>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>> >>> regards >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 21:48:03 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:48:03 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> Hi Mark, does line 230 in NetworkInterface.c still need a NULL check ? regards, Sean. > 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, "defaultIndex", "I"); On 21/01/2015 21:42, Chris Hegarty wrote: >> On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> >> update webrev with suggested amendments >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ > Looks good Mark. > > -Chris. > >> regards >> Mark >> >>> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >>> While we're here, what about line 230 in src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >>> >>> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >>> >>> regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>>> Hi >>>> please oblige and review the following changes >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>>> which address the issue >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>>> >>>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>>> >>>> regards >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 21:55:54 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:55:54 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> Hi Sean, you could put one in, but the JNI call is the last statement in the function, so the CHECK_NULL would be superfluous as the return from the function is executed next, as as such there is no possible conflict with another JNI call at that point. 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, "defaultIndex", "I"); 231 } Maybe for consistency and style? I did amend a couple of minor issues in NetworkInterface.c regards Mark On 21/01/2015 21:48, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Hi Mark, > > does line 230 in NetworkInterface.c still need a NULL check ? > > regards, > Sean. > >> 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, >> "defaultIndex", "I"); > > On 21/01/2015 21:42, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard >>> wrote: >>> >>> update webrev with suggested amendments >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ >> Looks good Mark. >> >> -Chris. >> >>> regards >>> Mark >>> >>>> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>> Hi Mark, >>>> >>>> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >>>> While we're here, what about line 230 in >>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >>>> >>>> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call >>>> cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >>>> >>>> regards, >>>> Sean. >>>> >>>>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>>>> Hi >>>>> please oblige and review the following changes >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>>>> which address the issue >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>>>> >>>>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 22:09:18 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:09:18 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C0238E.6050109@oracle.com> I thought there was still a possibility to have a NULL value floating around. In any case, I'm not seeing ni_defaultIndexID being used. Wondering if it's a necessary call. Not an issue for this bug fix. Your changes look fine to me also. regards, Sean. On 21/01/2015 21:55, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi Sean, > you could put one in, but the JNI call is the last statement in > the function, so the CHECK_NULL would be > superfluous as the return from the function is executed next, as as > such there is no possible conflict with another JNI call > at that point. > > 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, > "defaultIndex", "I"); > 231 } > > > > Maybe for consistency and style? > > I did amend a couple of minor issues in NetworkInterface.c > > regards > Mark > On 21/01/2015 21:48, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> does line 230 in NetworkInterface.c still need a NULL check ? >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >>> 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, >>> ni_class, "defaultIndex", "I"); >> >> On 21/01/2015 21:42, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> update webrev with suggested amendments >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ >>> Looks good Mark. >>> >>> -Chris. >>> >>>> regards >>>> Mark >>>> >>>>> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>> >>>>> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >>>>> While we're here, what about line 230 in >>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >>>>> >>>>> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call >>>>> cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> Sean. >>>>> >>>>>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> please oblige and review the following changes >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>>>>> which address the issue >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>>>>> >>>>>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> Mark >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 22:18:02 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:18:02 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54C0238E.6050109@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> <54C0238E.6050109@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C0259A.4030207@oracle.com> OK .. thanks Sean, Chris for reviews On 21/01/2015 22:09, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I thought there was still a possibility to have a NULL value floating > around. In any case, I'm not seeing ni_defaultIndexID being used. > Wondering if it's a necessary call. Not an issue for this bug fix. > Your changes look fine to me also. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 21/01/2015 21:55, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> Hi Sean, >> you could put one in, but the JNI call is the last statement in >> the function, so the CHECK_NULL would be >> superfluous as the return from the function is executed next, as as >> such there is no possible conflict with another JNI call >> at that point. >> >> 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, >> "defaultIndex", "I"); >> 231 } >> >> >> >> Maybe for consistency and style? >> >> I did amend a couple of minor issues in NetworkInterface.c >> >> regards >> Mark >> On 21/01/2015 21:48, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Hi Mark, >>> >>> does line 230 in NetworkInterface.c still need a NULL check ? >>> >>> regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>>> 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, >>>> ni_class, "defaultIndex", "I"); >>> >>> On 21/01/2015 21:42, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>>>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> update webrev with suggested amendments >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ >>>> Looks good Mark. >>>> >>>> -Chris. >>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> Mark >>>>> >>>>>> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>>> >>>>>> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >>>>>> While we're here, what about line 230 in >>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >>>>>> >>>>>> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call >>>>>> cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >>>>>> >>>>>> regards, >>>>>> Sean. >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>> please oblige and review the following changes >>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>>>>>> which address the issue >>>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>>>>>> >>>>>>> regards >>>>>>> Mark >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> > From james.graham at oracle.com Wed Jan 21 22:18:31 2015 From: james.graham at oracle.com (Jim Graham) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 14:18:31 -0800 Subject: RFR: JDK-8068028 - JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net In-Reply-To: <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> References: <54BFDDDC.7000709@oracle.com> <54BFE2D4.7060704@oracle.com> <54C015ED.7060009@oracle.com> <70227040-6372-4055-826E-75B4940D0C07@oracle.com> <54C01E93.6040103@oracle.com> <54C0206A.9070703@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C025B7.6070201@oracle.com> If another engineer decides in the future that one more thing needs to be done in that function and goes to the end of it and appends more code then all of this careful reasoning will disappear and the problem will surface... ...jim On 1/21/15 1:55 PM, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi Sean, > you could put one in, but the JNI call is the last statement in the > function, so the CHECK_NULL would be > superfluous as the return from the function is executed next, as as such > there is no possible conflict with another JNI call > at that point. > > 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, > "defaultIndex", "I"); > 231 } > > > > Maybe for consistency and style? > > I did amend a couple of minor issues in NetworkInterface.c > > regards > Mark > On 21/01/2015 21:48, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> does line 230 in NetworkInterface.c still need a NULL check ? >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >>> 230 ni_defaultIndexID = (*env)->GetStaticFieldID(env, ni_class, >>> "defaultIndex", "I"); >> >> On 21/01/2015 21:42, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>>> On 21 Jan 2015, at 21:11, Mark Sheppard >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> update webrev with suggested amendments >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev.02/ >>> Looks good Mark. >>> >>> -Chris. >>> >>>> regards >>>> Mark >>>> >>>>> On 21/01/2015 17:33, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>> >>>>> does line 121 in net_util_md.c also require a NULL check ? >>>>> While we're here, what about line 230 in >>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/NetworkInterface.c ? >>>>> >>>>> For the Inet6AddressImpl.c change, do you need to call >>>>> cleanupAndReturn like the Inet4 implementation ? >>>>> >>>>> regards, >>>>> Sean. >>>>> >>>>>> On 21/01/15 17:11, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> please oblige and review the following changes >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8068028/webrev/ >>>>>> which address the issue >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068028 >>>>>> >>>>>> CHECK_NULL added to JNI function call returns in >>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/Inet6AddressImpl.c >>>>>> src/solaris/native/java/net/net_util_md.c >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> Mark >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 09:22:23 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 09:22:23 +0000 Subject: [8u60] - Request for Approval : RFR 8069302 Deprecate Unsafe monitor methods in JDK 8u release In-Reply-To: <48C8A30A-6393-4D6F-8ED6-E767AC93FFF8@oracle.com> References: <7BA76D88-2443-4DF2-AC64-439FF0911CDA@oracle.com> <48C8A30A-6393-4D6F-8ED6-E767AC93FFF8@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C0C14F.6040800@oracle.com> Paul, Approved for jdk8u-dev. Can you add a subcomponent to the bug, add the 9-na label and add a suitable noreg- label. regards, Sean. On 21/01/2015 19:43, John Rose wrote: > +1; do it. > >> On Jan 21, 2015, at 2:35 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> The Unsafe monitor methods monitorEnter. monitorExit and tryMonitorEnter were removed from JDK 9 [1]. >> >> I would like to mark those methods as deprecated in 8u60. I doubt no one will notice :-) but it's the correct thing to do. >> >> Paul. >> >> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/0a0a0986400e From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 14:43:05 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:43:05 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions Message-ID: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> Hi please oblige and approve the following change http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 which is a backport of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 null return checks added to JNI calls changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html regards Mark From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 14:47:54 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:47:54 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions In-Reply-To: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> References: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C10D9A.4060409@oracle.com> Mark, did the jdk9 changeset import cleanly (post unshuffling) ? Approved, if so. If changes were needed, please obtain a review before pushing. regards, Sean. On 22/01/2015 14:43, Mark Sheppard wrote: > > Hi > please oblige and approve the following change > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ > for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 > > which is a backport of > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 > > null return checks added to JNI calls > > changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 > review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html > > regards > Mark > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 15:56:06 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:56:06 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions In-Reply-To: <54C10D9A.4060409@oracle.com> References: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> <54C10D9A.4060409@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C11D96.6010604@oracle.com> Hi Sean, I did these changes a while back prior to jdk9 src structure changes. The import was clean enough, from what I can remember I didn't make any manual changes. regards Mark On 22/01/2015 14:47, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Mark, > > did the jdk9 changeset import cleanly (post unshuffling) ? Approved, > if so. > If changes were needed, please obtain a review before pushing. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 22/01/2015 14:43, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> >> Hi >> please oblige and approve the following change >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ >> for >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 >> >> which is a backport of >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 >> >> null return checks added to JNI calls >> >> changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 >> review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html >> >> regards >> Mark >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 18:17:59 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:17:59 +0000 Subject: How to push security fixes for non-Oracle platforms after CPU fixes? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54C13ED7.9030707@oracle.com> Volker, Given that 8u40 is now in the RDP2 state, we're following the phase 2 integration process : http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html Only maintainers/gatekeepers should integrate to the stabilization forests. For now, I suggest you proceed to get this fixed in 8u60 (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/) via the standard hotspot integration process. Alejandro (cc'ed) can then help to get this requested for inclusion into 8u40 once it's in 8u60 and has had nightly testing run etc. 8050807 is now also in JDK 9 forest so you can work on both in tandem I guess. regards, Sean. On 21/01/2015 10:47, Volker Simonis wrote: > Hi, > > today, after the release of 8u31 you've pushed the corresponding > security fixes to jdk8u40 (see > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002910.html). > > We have a change which fixes "8050807: Better performing performance > data handling" on AIX. We had already send this fix to Oracle trough > our licensee channel, however if was too late to get it into the 8u31. > Therefore it's now missing from 8u40. > > What's the best way of getting this as fast as possible into 8u40 and > the other 8u repos (8udev, 8u60). As far as I know, changes usually > flow from jdk9/dev -> jdk8u/dev -> jdk8u/jdk8u40. But in this case > it's different, because 8050807 hasn't yet been pushed to jdk9. > > Can I just send a RFR to the jdk8u-dev list and push it right to 8u40 > myself once I get the approval? It's a hotspot change, but it's > already reviewed, I'm a jdk8u committer and the change only touches > aix-specific files? > > Thank you and best regards, > Volker From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 19:27:12 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 12:27:12 -0700 Subject: How to push security fixes for non-Oracle platforms after CPU fixes? In-Reply-To: <54C13ED7.9030707@oracle.com> References: <54C13ED7.9030707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C14F10.40003@oracle.com> On 1/22/2015 11:17 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Volker, > > Given that 8u40 is now in the RDP2 state, we're following the phase 2 > integration process : > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html > > Only maintainers/gatekeepers should integrate to the stabilization > forests. > > For now, I suggest you proceed to get this fixed in 8u60 > (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/) via the standard hotspot > integration process. Alejandro (cc'ed) can then help to get this > requested for inclusion into 8u40 once it's in 8u60 and has had > nightly testing run etc. 8050807 is now also in JDK 9 forest so you > can work on both in tandem I guess. Volker, I plan to take a snapshot of jdk8u/hs-dev tomorrow (Friday) please try to get that reviewed and pushed to it by then if possible, so it goes through PIT this weekend. As Sean indicated we can then try to get it to 8u40, but note that is kind of late in the release cycle, so the release team is only accepting show stoppers at this point; you will need to provide a major justification for this being added this late. cheers Alejandro > > regards, > Sean. > > On 21/01/2015 10:47, Volker Simonis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> today, after the release of 8u31 you've pushed the corresponding >> security fixes to jdk8u40 (see >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002910.html). >> >> >> We have a change which fixes "8050807: Better performing performance >> data handling" on AIX. We had already send this fix to Oracle trough >> our licensee channel, however if was too late to get it into the 8u31. >> Therefore it's now missing from 8u40. >> >> What's the best way of getting this as fast as possible into 8u40 and >> the other 8u repos (8udev, 8u60). As far as I know, changes usually >> flow from jdk9/dev -> jdk8u/dev -> jdk8u/jdk8u40. But in this case >> it's different, because 8050807 hasn't yet been pushed to jdk9. >> >> Can I just send a RFR to the jdk8u-dev list and push it right to 8u40 >> myself once I get the approval? It's a hotspot change, but it's >> already reviewed, I'm a jdk8u committer and the change only touches >> aix-specific files? >> >> Thank you and best regards, >> Volker > -- Alejandro From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 20:50:36 2015 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (mikhail cherkasov) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 23:50:36 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8065709: Deadlock in awt/logging apparently introduced by 8019623 Message-ID: <54C1629C.3000104@oracle.com> Hi all, Could you please approve a backport of the following changeset: jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/2aa2f3d6c886 JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065709 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8065709/8/webrev/ Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008862.html Thanks, Mikhail. From yumin.qi at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 21:41:46 2015 From: yumin.qi at oracle.com (Yumin Qi) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 13:41:46 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8065709: Deadlock in awt/logging apparently introduced by 8019623 In-Reply-To: <54C1629C.3000104@oracle.com> References: <54C1629C.3000104@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C16E9A.3050707@oracle.com> Approved. Thanks Yumin On 1/22/2015 12:50 PM, mikhail cherkasov wrote: > Hi all, > > Could you please approve a backport of the following changeset: > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/2aa2f3d6c886 > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065709 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8065709/8/webrev/ > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008862.html > > Thanks, > Mikhail. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 21:51:37 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:51:37 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8065709: Deadlock in awt/logging apparently introduced by 8019623 In-Reply-To: <54C16E9A.3050707@oracle.com> References: <54C1629C.3000104@oracle.com> <54C16E9A.3050707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C170E9.9090303@oracle.com> Approved for push. Please add an appropriate noreg label. -Rob On 22/01/15 21:41, Yumin Qi wrote: > Approved. > > Thanks > Yumin > > On 1/22/2015 12:50 PM, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Could you please approve a backport of the following changeset: >> jdk9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/2aa2f3d6c886 >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065709 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8065709/8/webrev/ >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008862.html >> >> Thanks, >> Mikhail. > From yumin.qi at oracle.com Thu Jan 22 22:00:52 2015 From: yumin.qi at oracle.com (Yumin Qi) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:00:52 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8065709: Deadlock in awt/logging apparently introduced by 8019623 In-Reply-To: <54C16E9A.3050707@oracle.com> References: <54C1629C.3000104@oracle.com> <54C16E9A.3050707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C17314.3000002@oracle.com> recalled. I am not the one to approve it. Sorry for the interference. Thanks Yumin On 1/22/2015 1:41 PM, Yumin Qi wrote: > Approved. > > Thanks > Yumin > > On 1/22/2015 12:50 PM, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Could you please approve a backport of the following changeset: >> jdk9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/2aa2f3d6c886 >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065709 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8065709/8/webrev/ >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-January/008862.html >> >> Thanks, >> Mikhail. > From iris.clark at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 03:54:48 2015 From: iris.clark at oracle.com (Iris Clark) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 19:54:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Java SE 8 Maintenance Review: Additional changes Message-ID: <71fe3c6d-8225-4914-8864-3e7d11da0b61@default> Hi. I will be asking jcp.org to post an update to the JSR 337 Maintenance Draft Review contents [0,1] to cover the addition of the following critical updates: - Verification of a failed invokespecial call outside an method should be corrected - Verification of a failed invokespecial call inside an method should be corrected As a reminder, the Review for JSR 337 ends on 2 February with the Ballot running from 3-9 February. Assuming that the Maintenance Review Ballot succeeds, Oracle will produce a Maintenance Release [2] of JSR 337 which includes an updated Specification, RI, and TCK, expected March 2015. Thanks, iris [0] https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=337 [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002808.html [2] https://jcp.org/en/procedures/jcp2#5.3 From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 08:38:09 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:38:09 -0700 Subject: How to push security fixes for non-Oracle platforms after CPU fixes? In-Reply-To: <54C14F10.40003@oracle.com> References: <54C13ED7.9030707@oracle.com> <54C14F10.40003@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C20871.5090309@oracle.com> On 1/22/2015 12:27 PM, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > > On 1/22/2015 11:17 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Volker, >> >> Given that 8u40 is now in the RDP2 state, we're following the phase 2 >> integration process : >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html >> >> Only maintainers/gatekeepers should integrate to the stabilization >> forests. >> >> For now, I suggest you proceed to get this fixed in 8u60 >> (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/) via the standard hotspot >> integration process. Alejandro (cc'ed) can then help to get this >> requested for inclusion into 8u40 once it's in 8u60 and has had >> nightly testing run etc. 8050807 is now also in JDK 9 forest so you >> can work on both in tandem I guess. > Volker, I plan to take a snapshot of jdk8u/hs-dev tomorrow (Friday) > please try to get that reviewed and pushed to it by then if possible, > so it goes through PIT this weekend. > As Sean indicated we can then try to get it to 8u40, but note > that is kind of late in the release cycle, so the release team is > only accepting show stoppers at this point; you will need to > provide a major justification for this being added this late. > it was brought to my attention that since this is only affecting AIX, so we might be able to justify this with the release team, however, since that's a security issue, we might need special considerations as it's not coming through the regular channels for that type of changes. I'm checking with the release team to see how proceed, so hold on until I hear from them Thanks Alejandro > cheers > Alejandro > >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 21/01/2015 10:47, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> today, after the release of 8u31 you've pushed the corresponding >>> security fixes to jdk8u40 (see >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002910.html). >>> >>> >>> We have a change which fixes "8050807: Better performing performance >>> data handling" on AIX. We had already send this fix to Oracle trough >>> our licensee channel, however if was too late to get it into the 8u31. >>> Therefore it's now missing from 8u40. >>> >>> What's the best way of getting this as fast as possible into 8u40 and >>> the other 8u repos (8udev, 8u60). As far as I know, changes usually >>> flow from jdk9/dev -> jdk8u/dev -> jdk8u/jdk8u40. But in this case >>> it's different, because 8050807 hasn't yet been pushed to jdk9. >>> >>> Can I just send a RFR to the jdk8u-dev list and push it right to 8u40 >>> myself once I get the approval? It's a hotspot change, but it's >>> already reviewed, I'm a jdk8u committer and the change only touches >>> aix-specific files? >>> >>> Thank you and best regards, >>> Volker >> > -- Alejandro From alexandr.scherbatiy at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 10:24:13 2015 From: alexandr.scherbatiy at oracle.com (Alexander Scherbatiy) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:24:13 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8068031 JNI exception pending in jdk/src/macosx/native/sun/awt/awt.m Message-ID: <54C2214D.1010405@oracle.com> Hello, Could you approve the fix to JDK 8u-dev. The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068043 The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8068031/webrev.00 The fix checks for NULL returns in awt JNI calls and has been reviewed by Sergey Bylokhov and Alexander Zvegintsev. The fix is not applicable to JDK 9 because awt.m file has been refactored. Thanks, Alexandr. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 10:50:52 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:50:52 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8068031 JNI exception pending in jdk/src/macosx/native/sun/awt/awt.m In-Reply-To: <54C2214D.1010405@oracle.com> References: <54C2214D.1010405@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C2278C.6070509@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 23/01/15 10:24, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote: > Hello, > > Could you approve the fix to JDK 8u-dev. > > The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068043 > The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8068031/webrev.00 > > The fix checks for NULL returns in awt JNI calls and has been reviewed > by Sergey Bylokhov and Alexander Zvegintsev. > > The fix is not applicable to JDK 9 because awt.m file has been > refactored. > > Thanks, > Alexandr. > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 11:04:41 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:04:41 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8067748: (process) Child is terminated when parent's console is closed [win] Message-ID: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> Hi! Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067748 Jdk 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/76faf72d802f Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030944.html Sincerely yours, Ivan From Alan.Bateman at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 11:08:14 2015 From: Alan.Bateman at oracle.com (Alan Bateman) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:08:14 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8067748: (process) Child is terminated when parent's console is closed [win] In-Reply-To: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> References: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> On 23/01/2015 11:04, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hi! > > Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? > The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067748 > Jdk 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/76faf72d802f > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030944.html Do you want to give this some bake time in 9 first? -Alan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 11:17:07 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 11:17:07 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8067748: (process) Child is terminated when parent's console is closed [win] In-Reply-To: <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> References: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C22DB3.80002@oracle.com> Alan's suggestion makes sense I think. It's a delicate area - Maybe it's best if you let it soak for a week Ivan and come back to this list for approval then. regards, Sean. On 23/01/15 11:08, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 23/01/2015 11:04, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? >> The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067748 >> Jdk 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/76faf72d802f >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030944.html > Do you want to give this some bake time in 9 first? > > -Alan From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 11:17:02 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:17:02 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8067748: (process) Child is terminated when parent's console is closed [win] In-Reply-To: <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> References: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C22DAE.3010107@oracle.com> On 23.01.2015 14:08, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 23/01/2015 11:04, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? >> The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067748 >> Jdk 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/76faf72d802f >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030944.html > Do you want to give this some bake time in 9 first? > We've got an escalation from the customer about this issue: https://bug.oraclecorp.com/pls/bug/webbug_edit.edit_info_top?rptno=20384334 I can ask them if they can wait for a couple of weeks for the sake of additional testing. Sincerely yours, Ivan From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 11:18:01 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:18:01 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8067748: (process) Child is terminated when parent's console is closed [win] In-Reply-To: <54C22DAE.3010107@oracle.com> References: <54C22AC9.7060602@oracle.com> <54C22B9E.1090801@oracle.com> <54C22DAE.3010107@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C22DE9.1000608@oracle.com> Oops, sorry it wasn't meant for the open list :( From mike.yawn at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 12:00:35 2015 From: mike.yawn at oracle.com (Mike Yawn) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:00:35 -0500 Subject: Issue with ObjectReferenceImpl.invokeMethod in jdk8 Message-ID: <54C237E3.9020502@oracle.com> (cross posting from serviceability-dev list; I was told I might have better luck here so apologies to anyone getting duplicates) I'm seeing a regression moving from JDK7 to JDK8u40 with the invocation of a method in an annotation from a debugger. I have a simple annotation class with two methods. There is a unit test that retrieves the annotations (getDeclaredAnnotations()). After retrieving the annotations, I try to call ObjectReference.invokeMethod() to invoke each of the annotation's methods. In JDK7 this worked; in JDK8 it fails with an IllegalAccessException: "Not a default method". I've looked at the source for com.sun.tools.jdi.ObjectReferenceImpl and see significant changes between JDK7 and JDK8 due to the introduction of interface methods in JDK8. In JDK7, all methods were class (as opposed to interface) methods and the validation of the annotation methods was successful. In JDK8, validateMethodInvocation has been rewritten to be a small method that forwards the validation to one of two new methods, validateClassMethodInvocation or validateIFaceMethodInvocation. The implementation of validateClassMethodInvocation appears to be the same as the pre-JDK8 validateMethodInvocation -- validation that the annotation method would pass. However, the annotation method is being treated as an interface method (because method.declaringType() instanceof InterfaceTypeImpl is true) and going through validateIFaceMethodInvocation. The test there is that method.isDefault() -- and the annotation method returns false, thus the exception is thrown. I'm not sure what the correct behavior is here, but there are a couple of possibilities: - If annotation classes were treated as classes, rather than interfaces, then we'd go through the same validation as before and this would work. - Alternately. if methods on annotations were considered default methods, then we'd pass the new validation. (The annotations do have a "default" value specified, but not all annotation methods will, so this seems a less satisfactory solution) - Or, the validateIFaceMethodInvocation may need a special test for annotation methods and validate them differently than interface methods. Do I need to file a bug for this, or is this mailing list a better place to report/discuss the issue, or am I doing something wrong that I just got away with in JDK7 but JDK8 is closing a loophole, so to speak? Thanks, Mike Yawn From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 12:56:49 2015 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:56:49 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-6933879: URISyntaxException when non-alphanumeric characters are present in scope_id Message-ID: <54C24511.4020902@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the direct backport of the bug fix to 8u-dev Patch applies cleanly to JDK 8u. The bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6933879 The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/6933879/webrev.01/ JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/801eb37fc6c4 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008834.html Thanks -Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 13:47:36 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 13:47:36 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-6933879: URISyntaxException when non-alphanumeric characters are present in scope_id In-Reply-To: <54C24511.4020902@oracle.com> References: <54C24511.4020902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C250F8.70808@oracle.com> Konstantin, can you hold off pushing this fix to jdk8u for the moment ? It's a P4 and could have behavioural consequences (something we try and avoid in update releases). I see JDK-8071458 was logged to track IPv6 scope specifications. Let's see how this soaks into JDK 9 over coming days and let's see how JDK-8071458 progresses. regards, Sean. On 23/01/15 12:56, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the direct backport of the bug fix to 8u-dev > > Patch applies cleanly to JDK 8u. > > The bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6933879 > The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/6933879/webrev.01/ > > JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/801eb37fc6c4 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008834.html > > Thanks > -Konstantin From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 14:58:09 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 14:58:09 +0000 Subject: RFR [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions In-Reply-To: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> References: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C26181.1090701@oracle.com> Hi after some discussion, changing this to a RFR as there was some manual intervention so please oblige and review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 which is a backport of https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 null return checks added to JNI calls regards Mark On 22/01/2015 14:43, Mark Sheppard wrote: > > Hi > please oblige and approve the following change > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ > for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 > > which is a backport of > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 > > null return checks added to JNI calls > > changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 > review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html > > regards > Mark > From dmitry.cherepanov at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 14:07:03 2015 From: dmitry.cherepanov at oracle.com (Dmitry Cherepanov) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:07:03 +0400 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of deploy changes (8067172, 8068187, 8068456) Message-ID: <54C25587.10406@oracle.com> Requesting approval to integrate the following changes into jdk8u60 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067172 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068187 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068456 basically, the first change was accidentally pushed to wrong repo and it was reverted. Thanks Dmitry From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 15:15:15 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:15:15 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of deploy changes (8067172, 8068187, 8068456) In-Reply-To: <54C25587.10406@oracle.com> References: <54C25587.10406@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C26583.1060908@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 23/01/15 14:07, Dmitry Cherepanov wrote: > Requesting approval to integrate the following changes into jdk8u60 > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067172 > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068187 > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068456 > > basically, the first change was accidentally pushed to wrong repo and > it was reverted. > > Thanks > Dmitry > From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 15:40:17 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:40:17 -0700 Subject: How to push security fixes for non-Oracle platforms after CPU fixes? In-Reply-To: <54C20871.5090309@oracle.com> References: <54C13ED7.9030707@oracle.com> <54C14F10.40003@oracle.com> <54C20871.5090309@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C26B61.9010708@oracle.com> On 1/23/2015 1:38 AM, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > > On 1/22/2015 12:27 PM, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: >> >> On 1/22/2015 11:17 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Volker, >>> >>> Given that 8u40 is now in the RDP2 state, we're following the phase >>> 2 integration process : >>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/phase2/phase2-process.html >>> >>> Only maintainers/gatekeepers should integrate to the stabilization >>> forests. >>> >>> For now, I suggest you proceed to get this fixed in 8u60 >>> (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/) via the standard hotspot >>> integration process. Alejandro (cc'ed) can then help to get this >>> requested for inclusion into 8u40 once it's in 8u60 and has had >>> nightly testing run etc. 8050807 is now also in JDK 9 forest so you >>> can work on both in tandem I guess. >> Volker, I plan to take a snapshot of jdk8u/hs-dev tomorrow (Friday) >> please try to get that reviewed and pushed to it by then if possible, >> so it goes through PIT this weekend. >> As Sean indicated we can then try to get it to 8u40, but note >> that is kind of late in the release cycle, so the release team is >> only accepting show stoppers at this point; you will need to >> provide a major justification for this being added this late. >> > it was brought to my attention that since this is only affecting AIX, > so we might be able to justify this with the release team, however, > since that's a security issue, we might need special considerations > as it's not coming through the regular channels for that type of > changes. > I'm checking with the release team to see how proceed, so hold on > until I hear from them Hi Volker, We have the OK to go ahead and get this patch into 8u60 will get it into 8u40 soon after thanks Alejandro > > Thanks > Alejandro > >> cheers >> Alejandro >> >>> >>> regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 21/01/2015 10:47, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> today, after the release of 8u31 you've pushed the corresponding >>>> security fixes to jdk8u40 (see >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002910.html). >>>> >>>> >>>> We have a change which fixes "8050807: Better performing performance >>>> data handling" on AIX. We had already send this fix to Oracle trough >>>> our licensee channel, however if was too late to get it into the 8u31. >>>> Therefore it's now missing from 8u40. >>>> >>>> What's the best way of getting this as fast as possible into 8u40 and >>>> the other 8u repos (8udev, 8u60). As far as I know, changes usually >>>> flow from jdk9/dev -> jdk8u/dev -> jdk8u/jdk8u40. But in this case >>>> it's different, because 8050807 hasn't yet been pushed to jdk9. >>>> >>>> Can I just send a RFR to the jdk8u-dev list and push it right to 8u40 >>>> myself once I get the approval? It's a hotspot change, but it's >>>> already reviewed, I'm a jdk8u committer and the change only touches >>>> aix-specific files? >>>> >>>> Thank you and best regards, >>>> Volker >>> >> > -- Alejandro From chris.hegarty at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 15:54:51 2015 From: chris.hegarty at oracle.com (Chris Hegarty) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 15:54:51 +0000 Subject: RFR [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions In-Reply-To: <54C26181.1090701@oracle.com> References: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> <54C26181.1090701@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C26ECB.7060809@oracle.com> Reviewed ( if you still need it ). For a test I applied the JDK 9 changeset to a clean jdk8u-dev . It applies almost perfectly. $ hg import http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 applying http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 patching file src/windows/native/java/io/WinNTFileSystem_md.c Hunk #3 succeeded at 266 with fuzz 2 (offset 6 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 299 with fuzz 2 (offset 8 lines). -Chris. On 23/01/15 14:58, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi > after some discussion, changing this to a RFR as there was some > manual intervention > > so please oblige and review > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ > for > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 > > which is a backport of > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 > > null return checks added to JNI calls > > regards > Mark > > On 22/01/2015 14:43, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> >> Hi >> please oblige and approve the following change >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ >> for >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 >> >> which is a backport of >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 >> >> null return checks added to JNI calls >> >> changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 >> review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html >> >> regards >> Mark >> > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Fri Jan 23 16:01:44 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:01:44 +0000 Subject: RFR [8u-dev]: JDK-8028792 - (ch) Channels native code needs to be checked for methods calling JNI with pending exceptions In-Reply-To: <54C26ECB.7060809@oracle.com> References: <54C10C79.6030908@oracle.com> <54C26181.1090701@oracle.com> <54C26ECB.7060809@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C27068.3070604@oracle.com> thanks Chris ... On 23/01/2015 15:54, Chris Hegarty wrote: > Reviewed ( if you still need it ). > > For a test I applied the JDK 9 changeset to a clean jdk8u-dev . It > applies almost perfectly. > > $ hg import http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 > applying http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 > patching file src/windows/native/java/io/WinNTFileSystem_md.c > Hunk #3 succeeded at 266 with fuzz 2 (offset 6 lines). > Hunk #4 succeeded at 299 with fuzz 2 (offset 8 lines). > > -Chris. > > > On 23/01/15 14:58, Mark Sheppard wrote: >> Hi >> after some discussion, changing this to a RFR as there was some >> manual intervention >> >> so please oblige and review >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ >> for >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 >> >> which is a backport of >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 >> >> null return checks added to JNI calls >> >> regards >> Mark >> >> On 22/01/2015 14:43, Mark Sheppard wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> please oblige and approve the following change >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8051471/webrev/ >>> for >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051471 >>> >>> which is a backport of >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8028792 >>> >>> null return checks added to JNI calls >>> >>> changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/01b83dcdcc36 >>> review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2014-February/002508.html >>> >>> >>> regards >>> Mark >>> >> From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Sat Jan 24 01:55:53 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:55:53 -0700 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.60-b02 Message-ID: <54C2FBA9.8060004@oracle.com> Requesting approval to integrate hs25.60-b02 into jdk8u60-b01. A webrev is available at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u60/hs25.60-b02-jdk8u60-b01.webrev/ Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework 8048050: Agent NullPointerException when rmi.port in use 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit 8066763: fatal error "assert(false) failed: unexpected yanked node" in postaloc.cpp:139 8068678: new hotspot build - hs25.60-b02 8068881: SIGBUS in C2 compiled method weblogic.wsee.jaxws.framework.jaxrpc.EnvironmentFactory$SimulatedWsdlDefinitions. 8068909: SIGSEGV in c2 compiled code with OptimizeStringConcat -- Alejandro From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 09:27:19 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:27:19 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval for bulk integration of hs25.60-b02 In-Reply-To: <54C2FBA9.8060004@oracle.com> References: <54C2FBA9.8060004@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C60877.1030707@oracle.com> Approved pending positive PIT results. regards, Sean. On 24/01/2015 01:55, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > Requesting approval to integrate hs25.60-b02 into jdk8u60-b01. > > A webrev is available at: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~amurillo/8u60/hs25.60-b02-jdk8u60-b01.webrev/ > > Pre-integration testing is in progress; the integration will proceed > only after SQE has analyzed the results and approved. > > The fixes in the proposed integration are below. All have undergone > nightly testing and are already in a jdk9 repository. > > 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework > 8048050: Agent NullPointerException when rmi.port in use > 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge > SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit > 8066763: fatal error "assert(false) failed: unexpected yanked node" in > postaloc.cpp:139 > 8068678: new hotspot build - hs25.60-b02 > 8068881: SIGBUS in C2 compiled method > weblogic.wsee.jaxws.framework.jaxrpc.EnvironmentFactory$SimulatedWsdlDefinitions. > 8068909: SIGSEGV in c2 compiled code with OptimizeStringConcat > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 09:57:12 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:57:12 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8055045: StringIndexOutOfBoundsException while reading krb5.conf Message-ID: <54C60F78.4030102@oracle.com> Hi! Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? The fix is just like in jdk9 modulo unshuffling and moving the test files. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055045 Jdk 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ee47a5aac84e Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011646.html Sincerely yours, Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 09:59:09 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:59:09 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8055045: StringIndexOutOfBoundsException while reading krb5.conf In-Reply-To: <54C60F78.4030102@oracle.com> References: <54C60F78.4030102@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C60FED.3010407@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 26/01/2015 09:57, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hi! > > Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? > The fix is just like in jdk9 modulo unshuffling and moving the test > files. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055045 > Jdk 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ee47a5aac84e > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011646.html > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 10:00:52 2015 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 13:00:52 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8055045: StringIndexOutOfBoundsException while reading krb5.conf In-Reply-To: <54C60FED.3010407@oracle.com> References: <54C60F78.4030102@oracle.com> <54C60FED.3010407@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C61054.2020703@oracle.com> Thanks! On 26.01.2015 12:59, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 26/01/2015 09:57, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >> Hi! >> >> Would you please approve backporting this fix into jdk8u? >> The fix is just like in jdk9 modulo unshuffling and moving the test >> files. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055045 >> Jdk 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ee47a5aac84e >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011646.html >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Ivan >> > > > From lev.priima at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 14:15:28 2015 From: lev.priima at oracle.com (Lev Priima) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:15:28 +0000 Subject: RFA: 8067471: Use private static final char[0] for empty Strings In-Reply-To: <54BE9A44.3040307@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> <54BE9A44.3040307@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C64C00.1050606@oracle.com> Please approve and push: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067471 Review for 9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030749.html JDK 9 changeset can be smoothly applied by: ~/code/jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg diff --git -r 95f1c90ebb7f -r c60cf8acabb2) | sh ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - Lev From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 11:26:38 2015 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:26:38 +0300 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: JDK-8067344: Adjust java/lang/invoke/LFCaching/LFGarbageCollectedTest.java for recent changes in java.lang.invoke In-Reply-To: <54BFC5EF.6000708@oracle.com> References: <54BFC5EF.6000708@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C6246E.2080209@oracle.com> Kindly reminder On 21.01.2015 18:29, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the direct backport of the test bug fix to 8u60 > > The webrev is slightly different from that for JDK 9, but only in line > numbers, all the rest is just the same. > > The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067344 > The 8u60 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8067344_8u/webrev.00/ > > JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/75c351a01d3c > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-December/030452.html > > Thanks > -Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 11:29:14 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:29:14 +0000 Subject: RFA: 8067471: Use private static final char[0] for empty Strings In-Reply-To: <54C64C00.1050606@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> <54BE9A44.3040307@oracle.com> <54C64C00.1050606@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C6250A.7020406@oracle.com> Please add a suitable noreg label to the bug report : http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Approved. I can push this fix for you Lev. regards, Sean. On 26/01/15 14:15, Lev Priima wrote: > Please approve and push: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067471 > Review for 9: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030749.html > JDK 9 changeset can be smoothly applied by: > ~/code/jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg diff > --git -r 95f1c90ebb7f -r c60cf8acabb2) | sh > ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - > > Lev > > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 11:32:37 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:32:37 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: JDK-8067344: Adjust java/lang/invoke/LFCaching/LFGarbageCollectedTest.java for recent changes in java.lang.invoke In-Reply-To: <54C6246E.2080209@oracle.com> References: <54BFC5EF.6000708@oracle.com> <54C6246E.2080209@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C625D5.7080707@oracle.com> Approved. Might be good to add noreg-self label to bug report also. regards, Sean. On 26/01/15 11:26, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Kindly reminder > > On 21.01.2015 18:29, Konstantin Shefov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please approve the direct backport of the test bug fix to 8u60 >> >> The webrev is slightly different from that for JDK 9, but only in >> line numbers, all the rest is just the same. >> >> The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067344 >> The 8u60 webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8067344_8u/webrev.00/ >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/75c351a01d3c >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-December/030452.html >> >> Thanks >> -Konstantin > From lev.priima at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 14:44:56 2015 From: lev.priima at oracle.com (Lev Priima) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:44:56 +0000 Subject: RFA: 8067471: Use private static final char[0] for empty Strings In-Reply-To: <54C6250A.7020406@oracle.com> References: <54B986A2.3080809@oracle.com> <54BE72E3.30007@oracle.com> <54BE78E4.6050606@oracle.com> <54BE9A44.3040307@oracle.com> <54C64C00.1050606@oracle.com> <54C6250A.7020406@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C652E8.9050501@oracle.com> Thanks Se?n, "noreg-perf" benchmarks for 9: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8067471/ may be applied to verification for 8. Lev On 01/26/2015 11:29 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Please add a suitable noreg label to the bug report : > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg > > Approved. I can push this fix for you Lev. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 26/01/15 14:15, Lev Priima wrote: >> Please approve and push: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067471 >> Review for 9: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030749.html >> JDK 9 changeset can be smoothly applied by: >> ~/code/jdk8u-dev/jdk$ (cd ~/code/jdk9/dev/jdk && hg pull -u && hg >> diff --git -r 95f1c90ebb7f -r c60cf8acabb2) | sh >> ~/code/jdk9/dev/common/bin/unshuffle_patch.sh jdk - - | hg patch - >> >> Lev >> >> >> > From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 16:59:06 2015 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:59:06 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8062923: XSL: Run-time internal error in 'substring()' Message-ID: <54C6725A.2000904@oracle.com> Hello, Please, approve the backport of 8062923 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. The 8062924 bug was also fixed by backported changes (same as in JDK9). Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with fixed JDK8. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062923 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062924 JDK9 changesets: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/036b399b9dfa http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4f609d1be59e Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030866.html With Best Regards, Aleksej From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 17:00:04 2015 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:00:04 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8046817: JDK 8 schemagen tool does not generate xsd files for enum types Message-ID: <54C67294.8030908@oracle.com> Hello, Please, approve the backport of 8046817 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with fixed JDK8. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046817 JDK9 changesets: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxws/rev/3b14b7c9c719 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/0f6be80ba02c Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030983.html With Best Regards, Aleksej From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 17:16:22 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:16:22 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8062923: XSL: Run-time internal error in 'substring()' In-Reply-To: <54C6725A.2000904@oracle.com> References: <54C6725A.2000904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C67666.3060806@oracle.com> Please add an appropriate noreg keyword. Approved. -Rob On 26/01/15 16:59, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hello, > > Please, approve the backport of 8062923 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 > changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. > The 8062924 bug was also fixed by backported changes (same as in JDK9). > Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with > fixed JDK8. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062923 > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062924 > JDK9 changesets: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/036b399b9dfa > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4f609d1be59e > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030866.html > > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 17:17:56 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:17:56 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8062923: XSL: Run-time internal error in 'substring()' In-Reply-To: <54C67666.3060806@oracle.com> References: <54C6725A.2000904@oracle.com> <54C67666.3060806@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C676C4.9060105@oracle.com> Ah, ignore that. I see the test. -Rob On 26/01/15 17:16, Rob McKenna wrote: > Please add an appropriate noreg keyword. > > Approved. > > -Rob > > On 26/01/15 16:59, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please, approve the backport of 8062923 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 >> changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. >> The 8062924 bug was also fixed by backported changes (same as in JDK9). >> Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with >> fixed JDK8. >> >> JBS: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062923 >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062924 >> JDK9 changesets: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/036b399b9dfa >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4f609d1be59e >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030866.html >> >> >> With Best Regards, >> Aleksej > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 17:18:22 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:18:22 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8046817: JDK 8 schemagen tool does not generate xsd files for enum types In-Reply-To: <54C67294.8030908@oracle.com> References: <54C67294.8030908@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C676DE.9030303@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 26/01/15 17:00, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hello, > > Please, approve the backport of 8046817 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 > changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. > Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with > fixed JDK8. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046817 > > JDK9 changesets: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxws/rev/3b14b7c9c719 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/0f6be80ba02c > > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030983.html > > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From lana.steuck at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 18:23:02 2015 From: lana.steuck at oracle.com (lana.steuck at oracle.com) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:23:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: jdk8u-b23: jdk8u40-dev Message-ID: <201501261823.t0QIN2dB008324@jano-app.us.oracle.com> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/rev/5dd2ad6c7911 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/nashorn/rev/6ca090832d30 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/langtools/rev/fb294b49373b http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jdk/rev/41fe61722ce9 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxws/rev/b6755a463ccf http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/jaxp/rev/e07fbae1efea http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/hotspot/rev/0e67683b7001 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u40/corba/rev/62f7faef5ed9 --- All the fixes will be tested during promotion (no PIT testing at this point): List of all fixes: =================== JDK-8068889 core-libs Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects JDK-8068994 core-libs Forgot to add a test model to JDK-8068573 JDK-8068573 core-libs POJO setter using [] syntax throws an exception JDK-8069002 core-libs REGRESSION: test/script/external/test262/test/suite/ch11/11.2/11.2.3/S JDK-8069122 globalization l10n resource file update for JDK-8068491 JDK-8039921 security-libs SHA1WithDSA with key > 1024 bits not working From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 26 19:32:19 2015 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 22:32:19 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8062923: XSL: Run-time internal error in 'substring()' In-Reply-To: <54C676C4.9060105@oracle.com> References: <54C6725A.2000904@oracle.com> <54C67666.3060806@oracle.com> <54C676C4.9060105@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C69643.6020009@oracle.com> Ok. Thank you for the approval! -Aleksej On 01/26/2015 08:17 PM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Ah, ignore that. I see the test. > > -Rob > > On 26/01/15 17:16, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Please add an appropriate noreg keyword. >> >> Approved. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 26/01/15 16:59, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Please, approve the backport of 8062923 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 >>> changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. >>> The 8062924 bug was also fixed by backported changes (same as in JDK9). >>> Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures >>> with fixed JDK8. >>> >>> JBS: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062923 >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062924 >>> JDK9 changesets: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/036b399b9dfa >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4f609d1be59e >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030866.html >>> >>> >>> With Best Regards, >>> Aleksej >> > From lana.steuck at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 01:43:08 2015 From: lana.steuck at oracle.com (lana.steuck at oracle.com) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:43:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: jdk8u-b01: jdk8u-dev Message-ID: <201501270143.t0R1h88W016188@jano-app.us.oracle.com> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/rev/29d98ac8b377 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/nashorn/rev/af290f203369 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/langtools/rev/0ba07c272e33 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/6997c5d62334 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxws/rev/7a0dacd12a9e http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxp/rev/b0e15cd169a9 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/9989538b7507 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/corba/rev/15ae8298b34b --- All the fixes will be tested during promotion (no PIT testing at this point): List of all fixes: =================== JDK-8068283 client-libs Mac OS Incompatibility between JDK 6 and 8 regarding input method han JDK-8067364 client-libs Printing to Postscript doesn't support dieresis JDK-8065373 client-libs [macosx] jdk8, jdk7u60 Regression in Graphics2D drawing of derived Fon JDK-8068507 core-libs (fc) Rename the new jdk.net.enableFastFileTransfer system property to JDK-8068279 core-libs (typo in the spec) javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getLanguageName JDK-8068431 core-libs @since and @jdk.Exported are missing in jdk.nashorn.api.scripting clas JDK-8068889 core-libs Calling a @FunctionalInterface from JS leaks internal objects JDK-8067880 core-libs Dead typed push methods in ArrayData JDK-8068994 core-libs Forgot to add a test model to JDK-8068573 JDK-8068784 core-libs Halve the function object creation code size JDK-8068795 core-libs HttpServer missing tailing space for some response codes JDK-8068432 core-libs Inconsistent exception handling in CompletableFuture.thenCompose JDK-8068028 core-libs JNI exception pending in jdk/src/solaris/native/java/net JDK-8068580 core-libs JavaAdapterFactory.isAutoConvertibleFromFunction should be more robust JDK-8068603 core-libs NashornScriptEngine.put/get() impls don't conform to NPE, IAE spec ass JDK-8068524 core-libs NashornScriptEngineFactory.getParameter() throws IAE for an unknown ke JDK-8068573 core-libs POJO setter using [] syntax throws an exception JDK-8069002 core-libs REGRESSION: test/script/external/test262/test/suite/ch11/11.2/11.2.3/S JDK-8068462 core-libs javax.script.ScriptEngineFactory.getParameter spec is not completely c JDK-8031036 core-svc Used for the fix push for JDK-8038322: CounterMonitorDeadlockTest.jav JDK-8038309 core-svc closed/javax/management/openmbean/OpenTypeClassNameTest.java failed be JDK-8068650 docs $jdk/api/javac/tree contains docs for nashorn JDK-8068485 infrastructure Update references of download.oracle.com to docs.oracle.com in javadoc JDK-8068491 infrastructure Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS. JDK-8039921 security-libs SHA1WithDSA with key > 1024 bits not working JDK-8062170 security-libs java.security.ProviderException: Error parsing configuration with spac JDK-8068639 tools Make certain annotation classfile warnings opt-in JDK-8068495 tools Update the protocol for references of docs.oracle.com to HTTPS in lang JDK-8069181 tools java.lang.AssertionError when compiling JDK 1.4 code in JDK 8 JDK-8064857 tools javac generates LVT entry with length 0 for local variable JDK-8068548 tools jdeps needs a different mechanism to recognize javax.jnlp as supported From volker.simonis at gmail.com Tue Jan 27 10:20:18 2015 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:20:18 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: 8069590: AIX port of "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" In-Reply-To: <54C75DDB.6010409@oracle.com> References: <54C75DDB.6010409@oracle.com> Message-ID: My change is based on http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot and I'd like to push it there. Alejandro can not test this anyway as it is AIX-only. @Alejandro: can I push this directly to http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot now? If we go trough http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ we loose even more time and we'll never make it into 8u40. Thanks, Volker On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Changes are fine and I think you can push it. Nothing in JPRT queue is > pushing into 8u. > Note, your changes are based on different repository from what we use to > push Hotspot into 8u. We use: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ > > Alejandro will promoted changes into /jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot after testing. > > But may be you have agreement with Alejandro where to push. Ignore me then. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > > On 1/27/15 12:34 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> Can I push this to 8u-dev now? >> >> Thanks, >> Volker >> >> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Volker Simonis >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> can you please approve this security fix which is the AIX-port port of >>> "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" from 8u31. For >>> some reason this AIX-version didn't made it right right in time into >>> 8u31 so we have to manually port it now to jdk8u-dev. >>> >>> This fix is AIX-only, it is reviewed and it cleanly applies to both, >>> jdk8u-dev and jdk8u40 >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8069590_jdk8u/ >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069590 >>> >>> This fix should also be pushed to 8u40 if that is possible at all. >>> >>> Thank you and best regards, >>> Volker From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 11:58:55 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:58:55 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: 8069590: AIX port of "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" In-Reply-To: References: <54C75DDB.6010409@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C77D7F.7040707@oracle.com> Volker, I don't see any issues with this being pushed to the jdk8u-dev team forest. Consider it approved for there. Before any push, let's first see if Alejandro is ok with that. He should be online in a few hours. Once I see this in 8u60 team forest, I'll log a request to have this included in 8u40. regards, Sean. On 27/01/2015 10:20, Volker Simonis wrote: > My change is based on > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot and I'd like to > push it there. > > Alejandro can not test this anyway as it is AIX-only. > > @Alejandro: can I push this directly to > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot now? > > If we go trough http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ we > loose even more time and we'll never make it into 8u40. > > Thanks, > Volker > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Vladimir Kozlov > wrote: >> Changes are fine and I think you can push it. Nothing in JPRT queue is >> pushing into 8u. >> Note, your changes are based on different repository from what we use to >> push Hotspot into 8u. We use: >> >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ >> >> Alejandro will promoted changes into /jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot after testing. >> >> But may be you have agreement with Alejandro where to push. Ignore me then. >> >> Thanks, >> Vladimir >> >> >> On 1/27/15 12:34 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> Can I push this to 8u-dev now? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Volker >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Volker Simonis >>> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> can you please approve this security fix which is the AIX-port port of >>>> "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" from 8u31. For >>>> some reason this AIX-version didn't made it right right in time into >>>> 8u31 so we have to manually port it now to jdk8u-dev. >>>> >>>> This fix is AIX-only, it is reviewed and it cleanly applies to both, >>>> jdk8u-dev and jdk8u40 >>>> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8069590_jdk8u/ >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069590 >>>> >>>> This fix should also be pushed to 8u40 if that is possible at all. >>>> >>>> Thank you and best regards, >>>> Volker From raymond.gallardo at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 15:24:18 2015 From: raymond.gallardo at oracle.com (raymond gallardo) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:24:18 -0500 Subject: OpenJDK 8u40 nroff files are once again up for review Message-ID: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> Hello Reviewers, As part of the OpenJDK review processes, and the next Java SE 8u40 release, the OpenJDK nroff files for Java tools are up for review. Please respond by *Thursday, January 29*. The webrev is available here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ Please provide your feedback by Thursday, January 29. The following sections describe what kinds of review comments we're looking for and what has changed for Java SE 8u40. Please contact us if you have any questions. Summary of Changes Scope of Review Provide Feedback *Summary of Changes* Technical content changes related to JDK 8 features have been made. These changes have already been reviewed by the engineer responsible for each feature. HTML documentation for Java tools has also been generated, which has the same content as the nroff files up for review, and which will be available on download.java.net. The following lists significant changes made to the Java tool nroff pages for this release as well as the engineer who reviewed the content. java JDK-8059929: Document changes to tiered compilation and code cache size options (Vladimir Kozlov) JDK-8068751: Document the option -XX:+CheckEndorsedAndExtDirs flag in java launcher man page (Mandy Chung) jjs JDK-8062100: removed unsupported options so that doc would match output of jjs -h (Hannes Wallnoefer ) jcmd Reformatted text *Scope of Review* Please provide a sanity check of content as opposed to reviewing the nroff markup itself. A line-by-line comparison between the html and nroff versions is not needed. *Provide Feedback* Please indicate your approval and provide feedback by e-mail by *Thursday, January 29* All feedback will be triaged. Severe technical inaccuracies and other small bugs will be fixed. Due to Java SE 8u40 release plan deadlines, bugs will be filed for large scale changes and will most likely be handled in a future update release. Thank you, The Java SE Documentation Team From volker.simonis at gmail.com Tue Jan 27 15:45:10 2015 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 16:45:10 +0100 Subject: [8u40] Review request for 8065702+8065675 Deprecate the Endorsed and Extension Mechanisms In-Reply-To: <5480AE76.80108@oracle.com> References: <5480AE76.80108@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Mandy, this change causes failures in the JCK 8 test 'api/signaturetest/sigtest.basic.html#basic': Added Annotations ----------------- java.util.jar.Attributes$Name: EXTENSION_INSTALLATION:anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated() java.util.jar.Attributes$Name: IMPLEMENTATION_URL:anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated() java.util.jar.Attributes$Name: IMPLEMENTATION_VENDOR_ID:anno 0 java.lang.Deprecated() java: Failed. 3 errors We're currently using JCK8a. Will the test be updated for JCK8b in time for the release of 8u40 or will the test be added to the exclude list? Thank you and best regards, Volker On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: > This is to request review and approval to putback these spec changes > in 8u40. > JDK-8065702 Deprecate the Extension Mechanism > JDK-8065675 Deprecate the Endorsed-Standards Override Mechanism > > The endorsed and extension mechanisms are proposed to be removed > in JDK 9 [1]. This patch updates the following specifications: > > 1. javadoc of System.getProperties to deprecate "java.ext.dirs" > > 2. deprecate three fields injava.util.jar.Attributes.Names > EXTENSION_INSTALLATION > IMPLEMENTATION_VENDOR_ID > IMPLEMENTATION_URL > > 3. deprecate the ability of a JAR-packaged applet to depend on > an installed optional package and trigger downloading of > optional packages and its relevant attributes > > TheMaintenance Review of JSR 337 (Java SE 8) will indicate the > above spec changes. There is no implementation change in this > patch. > > The specification of the Class-Path attribute and Sealed attributes > are misplaced and they should belong to the JAR file specification. > This patch moves them from extensions to the JAR file specification. > > Webrev at: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8065702/webrev.00/ > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8065702/api-diff/overview-summary.html > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mchung/jdk8u/webrevs/8065702/specdiff/overview-summary.html > > Mandy > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/220 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8/spec/ > From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 17:42:11 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:42:11 -0700 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: 8069590: AIX port of "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" In-Reply-To: <54C77D7F.7040707@oracle.com> References: <54C75DDB.6010409@oracle.com> <54C77D7F.7040707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C7CDF3.1050106@oracle.com> yes, that's totally fine with me in fact, you should probably push that kind of changes to that repo going forward, and we will avoid possible conflicts with jprt. We might do the same with jdk9 changes Thanks Alejandro On 1/27/2015 4:58 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Volker, > > I don't see any issues with this being pushed to the jdk8u-dev team > forest. Consider it approved for there. Before any push, let's first > see if Alejandro is ok with that. He should be online in a few hours. > > Once I see this in 8u60 team forest, I'll log a request to have this > included in 8u40. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 27/01/2015 10:20, Volker Simonis wrote: >> My change is based on >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot and I'd like to >> push it there. >> >> Alejandro can not test this anyway as it is AIX-only. >> >> @Alejandro: can I push this directly to >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot now? >> >> If we go trough http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ we >> loose even more time and we'll never make it into 8u40. >> >> Thanks, >> Volker >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Vladimir Kozlov >> wrote: >>> Changes are fine and I think you can push it. Nothing in JPRT queue is >>> pushing into 8u. >>> Note, your changes are based on different repository from what we >>> use to >>> push Hotspot into 8u. We use: >>> >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ >>> >>> Alejandro will promoted changes into /jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot after >>> testing. >>> >>> But may be you have agreement with Alejandro where to push. Ignore >>> me then. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Vladimir >>> >>> >>> On 1/27/15 12:34 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>> Can I push this to 8u-dev now? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Volker >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Volker Simonis >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> can you please approve this security fix which is the AIX-port >>>>> port of >>>>> "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" from 8u31. For >>>>> some reason this AIX-version didn't made it right right in time into >>>>> 8u31 so we have to manually port it now to jdk8u-dev. >>>>> >>>>> This fix is AIX-only, it is reviewed and it cleanly applies to both, >>>>> jdk8u-dev and jdk8u40 >>>>> >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8069590_jdk8u/ >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069590 >>>>> >>>>> This fix should also be pushed to 8u40 if that is possible at all. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you and best regards, >>>>> Volker > -- Alejandro From volker.simonis at gmail.com Tue Jan 27 17:46:13 2015 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:46:13 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for approval: 8069590: AIX port of "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" In-Reply-To: <54C7CDF3.1050106@oracle.com> References: <54C75DDB.6010409@oracle.com> <54C77D7F.7040707@oracle.com> <54C7CDF3.1050106@oracle.com> Message-ID: Thanks Alejandro! Just pushed... Regards, Volker On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Alejandro E Murillo wrote: > > yes, that's totally fine with me > in fact, you should probably push that kind of changes > to that repo going forward, and we will avoid possible > conflicts with jprt. We might do the same with jdk9 changes > > Thanks > Alejandro > > > On 1/27/2015 4:58 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> >> Volker, >> >> I don't see any issues with this being pushed to the jdk8u-dev team >> forest. Consider it approved for there. Before any push, let's first see if >> Alejandro is ok with that. He should be online in a few hours. >> >> Once I see this in 8u60 team forest, I'll log a request to have this >> included in 8u40. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 27/01/2015 10:20, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> >>> My change is based on >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot and I'd like to >>> push it there. >>> >>> Alejandro can not test this anyway as it is AIX-only. >>> >>> @Alejandro: can I push this directly to >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot now? >>> >>> If we go trough http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ we >>> loose even more time and we'll never make it into 8u40. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Volker >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Vladimir Kozlov >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Changes are fine and I think you can push it. Nothing in JPRT queue is >>>> pushing into 8u. >>>> Note, your changes are based on different repository from what we use to >>>> push Hotspot into 8u. We use: >>>> >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/hs-dev/hotspot/ >>>> >>>> Alejandro will promoted changes into /jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot after >>>> testing. >>>> >>>> But may be you have agreement with Alejandro where to push. Ignore me >>>> then. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Vladimir >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/27/15 12:34 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Can I push this to 8u-dev now? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Volker >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Volker Simonis >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> can you please approve this security fix which is the AIX-port port of >>>>>> "8050807: Better performing performance data handling" from 8u31. For >>>>>> some reason this AIX-version didn't made it right right in time into >>>>>> 8u31 so we have to manually port it now to jdk8u-dev. >>>>>> >>>>>> This fix is AIX-only, it is reviewed and it cleanly applies to both, >>>>>> jdk8u-dev and jdk8u40 >>>>>> >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2015/8069590_jdk8u/ >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069590 >>>>>> >>>>>> This fix should also be pushed to 8u40 if that is possible at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you and best regards, >>>>>> Volker >> >> > > -- > Alejandro > From mark.sheppard at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 22:30:57 2015 From: mark.sheppard at oracle.com (Mark Sheppard) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 22:30:57 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8040810 - Uninitialised memory in jdk/src/windows/native/java/net: net_util_md.c, TwoStacksPlainSocketImpl.c, TwoStacksPlainDatagramSocketImpl.c, DualStackPlainSocketImpl.c, DualStackPlainDatagramSocketImpl.c Message-ID: <54C811A1.7050807@oracle.com> Hi please approve the backport https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049612 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8040810/jdk8/webrev/ for the bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8040810 original changeset http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/66f582158e1c review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-July/008593.html regression pass OK. regards Mark From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 22:34:19 2015 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 14:34:19 -0800 Subject: OpenJDK 8u40 nroff files are once again up for review In-Reply-To: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> References: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C8126B.4060600@oracle.com> I looked on 'java' man page. Looks good. Thanks, Vladimir On 1/27/15 7:24 AM, raymond gallardo wrote: > Hello Reviewers, > > As part of the OpenJDK review processes, and the next Java SE 8u40 > release, the OpenJDK nroff files for Java tools are up for review. > Please respond by *Thursday, January 29*. > > The webrev is available here: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ > > Please provide your feedback by Thursday, January 29. > > The following sections describe what kinds of review comments we're > looking for and what has changed for Java SE 8u40. Please contact us if > you have any questions. > > Summary of Changes > Scope of Review > Provide Feedback > > *Summary of Changes* > > Technical content changes related to JDK 8 features have been made. > These changes have already been reviewed by the engineer responsible for > each feature. > > HTML documentation for Java tools has also been generated, which has the > same content as the nroff files up for review, and which will be > available on download.java.net. > > The following lists significant changes made to the Java tool nroff > pages for this release as well as the engineer who reviewed the content. > > java > > JDK-8059929: Document changes to tiered compilation and code cache size > options (Vladimir Kozlov) > > JDK-8068751: Document the option -XX:+CheckEndorsedAndExtDirs flag in > java launcher man page (Mandy Chung) > > jjs > > JDK-8062100: removed unsupported options so that doc would match output > of jjs -h (Hannes Wallnoefer > ) > > jcmd > > Reformatted text > > *Scope of Review* > > Please provide a sanity check of content as opposed to reviewing the > nroff markup itself. > > A line-by-line comparison between the html and nroff versions is not needed. > > *Provide Feedback* > > Please indicate your approval and provide feedback by e-mail by > *Thursday, January 29* > > All feedback will be triaged. Severe technical inaccuracies and other > small bugs will be fixed. Due to Java SE 8u40 release plan deadlines, > bugs will be filed for large scale changes and will most likely be > handled in a future update release. > > Thank you, > The Java SE Documentation Team > > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 22:48:38 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 22:48:38 +0000 Subject: RFA [8u-dev]: JDK-8040810 - Uninitialised memory in jdk/src/windows/native/java/net: net_util_md.c, TwoStacksPlainSocketImpl.c, TwoStacksPlainDatagramSocketImpl.c, DualStackPlainSocketImpl.c, DualStackPlainDatagramSocketImpl.c In-Reply-To: <54C811A1.7050807@oracle.com> References: <54C811A1.7050807@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C815C6.6040603@oracle.com> Approved, assuming the patch applies cleanly. -Rob On 27/01/15 22:30, Mark Sheppard wrote: > Hi > > please approve the backport > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049612 > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msheppar/8040810/jdk8/webrev/ > > for the > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8040810 > > original changeset > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/66f582158e1c > > review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-July/008593.html > > regression pass OK. > > regards > Mark From alejandro.murillo at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 23:11:04 2015 From: alejandro.murillo at oracle.com (Alejandro E Murillo) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 16:11:04 -0700 Subject: jdk8u60-b01: HotSpot Message-ID: <54C81B08.6060107@oracle.com> hs25.60-b02 has been integrated into jdk8u60-b01. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/rev/acf81f6fb265 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/corba/rev/15ae8298b34b http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/rev/702cc6067686 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxp/rev/b0e15cd169a9 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jaxws/rev/7a0dacd12a9e http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/jdk/rev/c46daef6edb5 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/langtools/rev/0ba07c272e33 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/nashorn/rev/af290f203369 Component : VM Status : 0 major failures, 0 minor failure Date : 01/27/2015 at 18:00 MSK Tested By : STT_VM Cost(total man-days): 1 Workspace : 2015-01-23-225626.amurillo.hs25-60-b02-snapshot Bundles : 2015-01-23-225626.amurillo.hs25-60-b02-snapshot Platforms : Others Tests : Log : link Browsers : NA Patches : NA Number of Tests Executed : 386791 passed tests, 3396 failed tests (no new failures) Bug verification status: ====================================== Tested, Pass: Tested, Pass (partial fixes): Tested, Fail: Untested bug fixes: 8043340: [macosx] Fix hard-wired paths to JavaVM.framework 8048050: Agent NullPointerException when rmi.port in use 8062063: Usage of UseHugeTLBFS, UseLargePagesInMetaspace and huge SurvivorAlignmentInBytes cause crashes in CMBitMapClosure::do_bit 8066763: fatal error "assert(false) failed: unexpected yanked node" in postaloc.cpp:139 8068678: new hotspot build - hs25.60-b02 8068881: SIGBUS in C2 compiled method weblogic.wsee.jaxws.framework.jaxrpc.EnvironmentFactory$SimulatedWsdlDefinitions. 8068909: SIGSEGV in c2 compiled code with OptimizeStringConcat New bugs filed: Bugs in PIT build: Bugs in earlier promoted build: Number of PIT requested: 1 Integration target J2SE build number: jdk8u60-b01 Issues and Notes: This is PIT for HS25.60-b02 for jdk8u60-b01. Go for integration. -- Alejandro From mandy.chung at oracle.com Tue Jan 27 23:19:38 2015 From: mandy.chung at oracle.com (Mandy Chung) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:19:38 -0800 Subject: OpenJDK 8u40 nroff files are once again up for review In-Reply-To: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> References: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C81D0A.4090408@oracle.com> On 1/27/15 7:24 AM, raymond gallardo wrote: > Hello Reviewers, > > As part of the OpenJDK review processes, and the next Java SE 8u40 > release, the OpenJDK nroff files for Java tools are up for review. > Please respond by *Thursday, January 29*. > > The webrev is available here: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ > The change for JDK-8068751 in the java man page looks fine. Mandy > Please provide your feedback by Thursday, January 29. > > The following sections describe what kinds of review comments we're > looking for and what has changed for Java SE 8u40. Please contact us > if you have any questions. > > Summary of Changes > Scope of Review > Provide Feedback > > *Summary of Changes* > > Technical content changes related to JDK 8 features have been made. > These changes have already been reviewed by the engineer responsible > for each feature. > > HTML documentation for Java tools has also been generated, which has > the same content as the nroff files up for review, and which will be > available on download.java.net. > > The following lists significant changes made to the Java tool nroff > pages for this release as well as the engineer who reviewed the content. > > java > > JDK-8059929: Document changes to tiered compilation and code cache > size options (Vladimir Kozlov) > > JDK-8068751: Document the option -XX:+CheckEndorsedAndExtDirs flag in > java launcher man page (Mandy Chung) > > jjs > > JDK-8062100: removed unsupported options so that doc would match > output of jjs -h (Hannes Wallnoefer > ) > > jcmd > > Reformatted text > > *Scope of Review* > > Please provide a sanity check of content as opposed to reviewing the > nroff markup itself. > > A line-by-line comparison between the html and nroff versions is not > needed. > > *Provide Feedback* > > Please indicate your approval and provide feedback by e-mail by > *Thursday, January 29* > > All feedback will be triaged. Severe technical inaccuracies and other > small bugs will be fixed. Due to Java SE 8u40 release plan deadlines, > bugs will be filed for large scale changes and will most likely be > handled in a future update release. > > Thank you, > The Java SE Documentation Team > > From Alan.Bateman at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 09:43:58 2015 From: Alan.Bateman at oracle.com (Alan Bateman) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 09:43:58 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8046817: JDK 8 schemagen tool does not generate xsd files for enum types In-Reply-To: <54C67294.8030908@oracle.com> References: <54C67294.8030908@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C8AF5E.6040003@oracle.com> On 26/01/2015 17:00, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hello, > > Please, approve the backport of 8046817 fix to JDK8. The JDK9 > changeset applies cleanly after unshuffling. > Testing: JPRT and XML related regression tests shows no failures with > fixed JDK8. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046817 > > JDK9 changesets: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxws/rev/3b14b7c9c719 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/0f6be80ba02c > This change is causing problems in jdk9/dev, would it be possible to hold off pushing to 8u until the issues there are understood? It's very possible of course that the issues in jdk9/dev are unique to that forest (because of the new modular image, changes to javac to use the new file system API, etc.). -Alan. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 17:21:44 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:21:44 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8066232: problem with conditional catch compilation Message-ID: <609C2167-5BF3-4B8A-8DE0-6D2D2FF8D5D7@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066232 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8066232/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2014-December/003957.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 17:22:05 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:22:05 +0100 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8067139: Finally blocks inlined incorrectly Message-ID: <4044B655-6D33-498E-B293-F58F618FD4EC@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067139 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8067139/webrev.00 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004121.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. Thanks, Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 17:37:39 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:37:39 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8066232: problem with conditional catch compilation In-Reply-To: <609C2167-5BF3-4B8A-8DE0-6D2D2FF8D5D7@oracle.com> References: <609C2167-5BF3-4B8A-8DE0-6D2D2FF8D5D7@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C91E63.7030608@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 28/01/2015 17:21, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066232 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8066232/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2014-December/003957.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 17:38:05 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:38:05 +0000 Subject: [8u60] Request for Approval: 8067139: Finally blocks inlined incorrectly In-Reply-To: <4044B655-6D33-498E-B293-F58F618FD4EC@oracle.com> References: <4044B655-6D33-498E-B293-F58F618FD4EC@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C91E7D.1000308@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 28/01/2015 17:22, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067139 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8067139/webrev.00 > jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2015-January/004121.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling from modular source code layout. > > Thanks, > Attila. From raymond.gallardo at oracle.com Wed Jan 28 22:27:54 2015 From: raymond.gallardo at oracle.com (raymond gallardo) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 17:27:54 -0500 Subject: Reminder: OpenJDK 8u40 nroff files are once again up for review In-Reply-To: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> References: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54C9626A.5000105@oracle.com> Hello reviewers, This is a reminder that the due date for comments for the OpenJDK nroff files for JDK 8u40 are due tomorrow, *Thursday, January 29th*. Thanks, --Raymond On 2015-01-27 10:24 AM, raymond gallardo wrote: > Hello Reviewers, > > As part of the OpenJDK review processes, and the next Java SE 8u40 > release, the OpenJDK nroff files for Java tools are up for review. > Please respond by *Thursday, January 29*. > > The webrev is available here: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ > > Please provide your feedback by Thursday, January 29. > > The following sections describe what kinds of review comments we're > looking for and what has changed for Java SE 8u40. Please contact us > if you have any questions. > > Summary of Changes > Scope of Review > Provide Feedback > > *Summary of Changes* > > Technical content changes related to JDK 8 features have been made. > These changes have already been reviewed by the engineer responsible > for each feature. > > HTML documentation for Java tools has also been generated, which has > the same content as the nroff files up for review, and which will be > available on download.java.net. > > The following lists significant changes made to the Java tool nroff > pages for this release as well as the engineer who reviewed the content. > > java > > JDK-8059929: Document changes to tiered compilation and code cache > size options (Vladimir Kozlov) > > JDK-8068751: Document the option -XX:+CheckEndorsedAndExtDirs flag in > java launcher man page (Mandy Chung) > > jjs > > JDK-8062100: removed unsupported options so that doc would match > output of jjs -h (Hannes Wallnoefer > ) > > jcmd > > Reformatted text > > *Scope of Review* > > Please provide a sanity check of content as opposed to reviewing the > nroff markup itself. > > A line-by-line comparison between the html and nroff versions is not > needed. > > *Provide Feedback* > > Please indicate your approval and provide feedback by e-mail by > *Thursday, January 29* > > All feedback will be triaged. Severe technical inaccuracies and other > small bugs will be fixed. Due to Java SE 8u40 release plan deadlines, > bugs will be filed for large scale changes and will most likely be > handled in a future update release. > > Thank you, > The Java SE Documentation Team > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 09:59:11 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:59:11 +0000 Subject: Reminder: OpenJDK 8u40 nroff files are once again up for review In-Reply-To: <54C9626A.5000105@oracle.com> References: <54C7ADA2.3040601@oracle.com> <54C9626A.5000105@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CA046F.9090007@oracle.com> Raymond - consider this approved for jdk8u-dev (8u60) - Please add a suitable noreg label to the JDK-8067380 bug report. Once pushed, you can submit a critical (phase2) request for 8u40 inclusion. regards, Sean. On 28/01/2015 22:27, raymond gallardo wrote: > Hello reviewers, > > This is a reminder that the due date for comments for the OpenJDK > nroff files for JDK 8u40 are due tomorrow, *Thursday, January 29th*. > > Thanks, > --Raymond > > On 2015-01-27 10:24 AM, raymond gallardo wrote: >> Hello Reviewers, >> >> As part of the OpenJDK review processes, and the next Java SE 8u40 >> release, the OpenJDK nroff files for Java tools are up for review. >> Please respond by *Thursday, January 29*. >> >> The webrev is available here: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ >> >> Please provide your feedback by Thursday, January 29. >> >> The following sections describe what kinds of review comments we're >> looking for and what has changed for Java SE 8u40. Please contact us >> if you have any questions. >> >> Summary of Changes >> Scope of Review >> Provide Feedback >> >> *Summary of Changes* >> >> Technical content changes related to JDK 8 features have been made. >> These changes have already been reviewed by the engineer responsible >> for each feature. >> >> HTML documentation for Java tools has also been generated, which has >> the same content as the nroff files up for review, and which will be >> available on download.java.net. >> >> The following lists significant changes made to the Java tool nroff >> pages for this release as well as the engineer who reviewed the content. >> >> java >> >> JDK-8059929: Document changes to tiered compilation and code cache >> size options (Vladimir Kozlov) >> >> JDK-8068751: Document the option -XX:+CheckEndorsedAndExtDirs flag in >> java launcher man page (Mandy Chung) >> >> jjs >> >> JDK-8062100: removed unsupported options so that doc would match >> output of jjs -h (Hannes Wallnoefer >> ) >> >> jcmd >> >> Reformatted text >> >> *Scope of Review* >> >> Please provide a sanity check of content as opposed to reviewing the >> nroff markup itself. >> >> A line-by-line comparison between the html and nroff versions is not >> needed. >> >> *Provide Feedback* >> >> Please indicate your approval and provide feedback by e-mail by >> *Thursday, January 29* >> >> All feedback will be triaged. Severe technical inaccuracies and other >> small bugs will be fixed. Due to Java SE 8u40 release plan deadlines, >> bugs will be filed for large scale changes and will most likely be >> handled in a future update release. >> >> Thank you, >> The Java SE Documentation Team >> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 11:01:55 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:01:55 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8065994: HTTP Tunnel connection to NTLM proxy reauthenticates instead of using keep-alive Message-ID: <54CA1323.3010308@oracle.com> Requesting to backport this to jdk8u-dev. JDK 9 patch applies cleanly post modular path unshuffling. bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065994 jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/7e88cae22c16 review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008832.html regards, Sean. From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 14:14:18 2015 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:14:18 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8065994: HTTP Tunnel connection to NTLM proxy reauthenticates instead of using keep-alive In-Reply-To: <54CA1323.3010308@oracle.com> References: <54CA1323.3010308@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CA403A.2070908@oracle.com> Approved. On 29.01.2015 12:01, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Requesting to backport this to jdk8u-dev. JDK 9 patch applies cleanly > post modular path unshuffling. > > bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065994 > jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/7e88cae22c16 > review thread : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008832.html > > regards, > Sean. > -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: J?rgen Kunz Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 15:25:00 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:25:00 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev]: JDK-8067680: (sctp) Possible race initializing native IDs Message-ID: <54CA50CC.5090402@oracle.com> Hi folks, Looking for approval for: bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067680 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b63edeaa2dd0 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008845.html Patch applies cleanly post shuffle. -Rob From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 15:26:47 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?B?U2XDoW4gQ29mZmV5?=) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:26:47 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev]: JDK-8067680: (sctp) Possible race initializing native IDs In-Reply-To: <54CA50CC.5090402@oracle.com> References: <54CA50CC.5090402@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CA5137.3060406@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 29/01/2015 15:25, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi folks, > > Looking for approval for: > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067680 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b63edeaa2dd0 > review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-January/008845.html > > Patch applies cleanly post shuffle. > > -Rob > From philip.race at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 17:38:09 2015 From: philip.race at oracle.com (Phil Race) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:38:09 -0800 Subject: [8u60] : Request for approval to backport: 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against headless awt library Message-ID: <54CA7001.4030902@oracle.com> Bug : 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against headless awt library https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 Review (of both 8 & 9 changes) : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-January/014146.html 8 webrev :- http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8071710.8u.1/ Change is already pushed to 9 .. -phil. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 29 17:41:36 2015 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:41:36 +0000 Subject: [8u60] : Request for approval to backport: 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against headless awt library In-Reply-To: <54CA7001.4030902@oracle.com> References: <54CA7001.4030902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CA70D0.40804@oracle.com> Please add an appropriate noreg label. Approved. -Rob On 29/01/15 17:38, Phil Race wrote: > Bug : 8071710: [solaris] libfontmanager should be linked against > headless awt library > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8071710 > Review (of both 8 & 9 changes) : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2015-January/014146.html > 8 webrev :- http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8071710.8u.1/ > > Change is already pushed to 9 .. > > -phil. > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:00:45 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:00:45 +0100 Subject: Review request for JDK-8071991 Message-ID: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> Please review JDK-8071991 at for Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. Thanks and apologies, Attila. From marcus.lagergren at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:02:26 2015 From: marcus.lagergren at oracle.com (Marcus Lagergren) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:02:26 +0100 Subject: Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> Message-ID: <695AEC78-1114-424F-8632-714787E46A3F@oracle.com> +1. Trivial. > On 30 Jan 2015, at 12:00, Attila Szegedi wrote: > > Please review JDK-8071991 at for > > Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. > > Thanks and apologies, > Attila. From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:05:32 2015 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:05:32 +0100 Subject: Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> +1 Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: > Please review JDK-8071991 at for > > Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. > > Thanks and apologies, > Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:07:00 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:07:00 +0000 Subject: - [Approval Request] Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add noreg-build and 9-na labels. regards, Sean. On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > +1 > > > Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >> Please review JDK-8071991 at >> for >> >> >> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to >> introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn >> in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect >> 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we >> backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the >> future. >> >> Thanks and apologies, >> Attila. > From attila.szegedi at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:25:23 2015 From: attila.szegedi at oracle.com (Attila Szegedi) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:25:23 +0100 Subject: - [Approval Request] Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> Message-ID: <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> Thanks for the approval. I have identified yet another change that needs to be made, though; a test for as backported for JDK-8066232 was incomplete (it was incomplete in 9 too - I investigated the history of it in 9 and saw that it was just fixed later in a 9-only changeset). A new webrev is at with a trivial addition to test/script/basic/JDK-8066232.js. I also updated the bug to reflect it's now a more general "fix all build/test issues introduced by the last two Nashorn backports". I can confirm that with these two changes all tests pass, so this should be the final word on this. Attila. On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add noreg-build and 9-na labels. > > regards, > Sean. > > On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >> +1 >> >> >> Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >>> Please review JDK-8071991 at for >>> >>> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. >>> >>> Thanks and apologies, >>> Attila. >> > From marcus.lagergren at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:27:37 2015 From: marcus.lagergren at oracle.com (Marcus Lagergren) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:27:37 +0100 Subject: - [Approval Request] Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> Message-ID: <9C2D87ED-148B-4DB4-979C-D07225336997@oracle.com> OK +1 to this as well. Equally trivial. /M > On 30 Jan 2015, at 12:25, Attila Szegedi wrote: > > Thanks for the approval. I have identified yet another change that needs to be made, though; a test for as backported for JDK-8066232 was incomplete (it was incomplete in 9 too - I investigated the history of it in 9 and saw that it was just fixed later in a 9-only changeset). A new webrev is at with a trivial addition to test/script/basic/JDK-8066232.js. I also updated the bug to reflect it's now a more general "fix all build/test issues introduced by the last two Nashorn backports". > > I can confirm that with these two changes all tests pass, so this should be the final word on this. > > Attila. > > On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > >> Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add noreg-build and 9-na labels. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >>>> Please review JDK-8071991 at for >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. >>>> >>>> Thanks and apologies, >>>> Attila. >>> >> > From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:30:52 2015 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 12:30:52 +0100 Subject: - [Approval Request] Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CB6B6C.5070708@oracle.com> +1 Am 2015-01-30 um 12:25 schrieb Attila Szegedi: > Thanks for the approval. I have identified yet another change that needs to be made, though; a test for as backported for JDK-8066232 was incomplete (it was incomplete in 9 too - I investigated the history of it in 9 and saw that it was just fixed later in a 9-only changeset). A new webrev is at with a trivial addition to test/script/basic/JDK-8066232.js. I also updated the bug to reflect it's now a more general "fix all build/test issues introduced by the last two Nashorn backports". > > I can confirm that with these two changes all tests pass, so this should be the final word on this. > > Attila. > > On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > >> Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add noreg-build and 9-na labels. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >>>> Please review JDK-8071991 at for >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. >>>> >>>> Thanks and apologies, >>>> Attila. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 11:33:05 2015 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?windows-1252?Q?Se=E1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:33:05 +0000 Subject: - [Approval Request] Review request for JDK-8071991 In-Reply-To: <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> References: <440AA679-4C12-4AE6-A8F6-45F0C3FC6249@oracle.com> <54CB657C.8040907@oracle.com> <54CB65D4.5080204@oracle.com> <6A811883-8569-4452-BCD7-1BCA1C99EAA0@oracle.com> Message-ID: <54CB6BF1.6080001@oracle.com> All good here too! regards, Sean. On 30/01/2015 11:25, Attila Szegedi wrote: > Thanks for the approval. I have identified yet another change that needs to be made, though; a test for as backported for JDK-8066232 was incomplete (it was incomplete in 9 too - I investigated the history of it in 9 and saw that it was just fixed later in a 9-only changeset). A new webrev is at with a trivial addition to test/script/basic/JDK-8066232.js. I also updated the bug to reflect it's now a more general "fix all build/test issues introduced by the last two Nashorn backports". > > I can confirm that with these two changes all tests pass, so this should be the final word on this. > > Attila. > > On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > >> Looks fine. Thanks for jumping on this. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Please add noreg-build and 9-na labels. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 30/01/2015 11:05, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> Am 2015-01-30 um 12:00 schrieb Attila Szegedi: >>>> Please review JDK-8071991 at for >>>> >>>> Unfortunately, backporting JDK-8067139 bit-by-bit managed to introduce a compile error as 8u-dev Nashorn diverges from 9 Nashorn in Parser.java. I failed to notice and fix that in time, so I expect 8u-dev build now breaks. Fixing post haste. I will suggest we backport the parser changes too so this can't cause issues in the future. >>>> >>>> Thanks and apologies, >>>> Attila. From raymond.gallardo at oracle.com Fri Jan 30 21:22:39 2015 From: raymond.gallardo at oracle.com (raymond gallardo) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:22:39 -0500 Subject: [8u40] Request for phase 2 approval for JDK-8067380 - Update nroff to integrate changes made in 8u40 Message-ID: <54CBF61F.1020008@oracle.com> Requesting approval for: JDK-8067380 : Update nroff to integrate changes made in 8u40 Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067380 8u-dev webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rgallard/openjdk_webrev_8u40_2/webrev/ 8u-dev review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-January/002986.html Reviewers: kvn, mchung, coffeys Rationale: Last-minute changes to the nroff tools pages Thanks, --Raymond