[8u76] Request for approval for CR 8143855 - Bad printf formatting in frame_zero.cpp

[David Holmes]

Reviewed.

This is an exact backport of the change to the file 
src/cpu/zero/vm/frame_zero.cpp

David

On 25/11/2015 6:20 PM, Seán Coffey wrote:
> On 25/11/2015 02:34, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> Can you add the 'regression' and '9-na' labels to the 8143855 bug report
>>> also ?
>>> A noreg label should also be added [1].
>>>
>> Done. Thanks for the link to this updated guide page. This is the first
>> time I've seen it. It is a little unclear when it suggests setting the
>> status to Open; it is not possible to set the status directly, instead
>> 'Triage' has to be clicked to change NEW -> OPEN.
> I'll see if we get a link to the JBS state model inserted after this point
> (state model : https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/general/JBS+Overview)
>>
>>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to code review given that this is not
>>> a direct JDK 9 backport. (cc'ing Coleen)
>> Ok, but this is just a subset of the original changeset. Arguably, it
>> should have been a separate changeset to begin with as these changes
>> have nothing to do with the rest of it. The line in question hasn't
>> been changed since it was introduced with the import of the Zero port
>> in 2009, but new build flags and/or compilers have triggered this latest
>> warning.
> I agree the change is small and safe, but I've seen failures before
> where parts of a fix
> are pulled into other releases. For the sake of consistency, it should
> be reviewed.
>
> Hopefully that can be done quickly by Coleen or any other jdk8u reviewer.
>
> regards,
> Sean.
>>
>>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sean.
>>>
>>> On 24/11/2015 01:08, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/openjdk8/8143855/webrev.01/
>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143855
>>>>
>>>> The Zero build is broken on current 8u, due to one of the arguments to
>>>> a print_cr statement being of the wrong type. This was already fixed
>>>> in OpenJDK 9 as part of 8075967 [0] [1]. The above webrev is a backport
>>>> of just the required frame_zero.cpp change from that changeset, which
>>>> applies as-is on OpenJDK 8.
>>>>
>>>> Ok to push to 8?
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075967
>>>> [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/2206bbeb318569e
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>
>