From aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com Mon Feb 1 12:05:38 2016 From: aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 15:05:38 +0300 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings Message-ID: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> Hi, I would like to backport a simple performance optimization to 8u: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059677 This change was in JDK 9 for at least a year now, and no problems were apparently discovered. The change comes in two parts: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/9dc4d4fc73ca http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0bddfc90d139 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029569.html Note that Roger had specific concerns about backporting, which seem unproblematic: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029589.html JDK part applies without problems, and HS part needs some fuzz in vm/runtime/thread.cpp. These are the proposed webrevs against 8u, for convenience: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.hs/ http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.jdk/ I re-ran full JPRT against 8u with this change, and it was clean. Cheers, -Aleksey From Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com Mon Feb 1 14:26:13 2016 From: Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com (Roger Riggs) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 09:26:13 -0500 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings In-Reply-To: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> References: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> +1 On 2/1/2016 7:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to backport a simple performance optimization to 8u: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059677 > > This change was in JDK 9 for at least a year now, and no problems were > apparently discovered. The change comes in two parts: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/9dc4d4fc73ca > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0bddfc90d139 > > Review thread: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029569.html > > Note that Roger had specific concerns about backporting, which seem > unproblematic: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029589.html > > JDK part applies without problems, and HS part needs some fuzz in > vm/runtime/thread.cpp. These are the proposed webrevs against 8u, for > convenience: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.hs/ > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.jdk/ > > I re-ran full JPRT against 8u with this change, and it was clean. > > Cheers, > -Aleksey > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 1 14:38:17 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 14:38:17 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings In-Reply-To: <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> References: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AF6DD9.5070802@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 01/02/16 14:26, Roger Riggs wrote: > +1 > > On 2/1/2016 7:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I would like to backport a simple performance optimization to 8u: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059677 >> >> This change was in JDK 9 for at least a year now, and no problems were >> apparently discovered. The change comes in two parts: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/9dc4d4fc73ca >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0bddfc90d139 >> >> Review thread: >> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029569.html >> >> >> Note that Roger had specific concerns about backporting, which seem >> unproblematic: >> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029589.html >> >> >> JDK part applies without problems, and HS part needs some fuzz in >> vm/runtime/thread.cpp. These are the proposed webrevs against 8u, for >> convenience: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.hs/ >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.jdk/ >> >> I re-ran full JPRT against 8u with this change, and it was clean. >> >> Cheers, >> -Aleksey >> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 1 15:48:42 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 15:48:42 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : RFR : 8038837:Add support to jarsigner for specifying timestamp hash algorithm Message-ID: <56AF7E5A.4070205@oracle.com> I'd like to port this fix to the jdk8u-dev forest. bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038837 webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8038837.8u/webrev/ JDK 8u code review : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-February/013383.html -- Regards, Sean. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Feb 1 16:44:44 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 16:44:44 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : RFR : 8038837:Add support to jarsigner for specifying timestamp hash algorithm In-Reply-To: <56AF7E5A.4070205@oracle.com> References: <56AF7E5A.4070205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AF8B7C.80902@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 01/02/16 15:48, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I'd like to port this fix to the jdk8u-dev forest. > > bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038837 > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8038837.8u/webrev/ > JDK 8u code review : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-February/013383.html > > From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 08:58:23 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:58:23 +0100 Subject: Result: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <56AB2B74.2020607@oracle.com> References: <56AB2B74.2020607@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B06FAF.7080008@oracle.com> The correct result is: Yes: 8 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 StefanK On 2016-01-29 10:05, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > Voting for Stefan Johansson [1] is now closed. > > Yes: 8 > Veto: 0 > Abstain: 8 > > According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is > sufficient to approve the nomination. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004784.html From sgehwolf at redhat.com Tue Feb 2 10:24:11 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 11:24:11 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> Hi Sean, Jaroslav, On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Severin, > > this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new system? > property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. Thanks for the heads-up. > Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this port ? Was there an answer that I've missed about this? Thanks, Severin > Regards, > Sean. > > On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related > > to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test > > introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be > > best to push everything together. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html > > > > The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed > > changing since there are differences in the available test library (no > > ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, > > though. > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/ > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html > > > > Test fix. Same as in 9. > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/ > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html > > > > Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used some > > JDK 9 only features, such as > > NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses() > > > > > > Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can > > push this via JPRT. > > > > Thanks, > > Severin > From jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 10:42:39 2016 From: jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com (Jaroslav Bachorik) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:42:39 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> On 2.2.2016 11:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > Hi Sean, Jaroslav, > > On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Severin, >> >> this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new system >> property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. > > Thanks for the heads-up. > >> Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this port ? > > Was there an answer that I've missed about this? Not yet. But, yes, I am going to file the CCC request. -JB- > > Thanks, > Severin > >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related >>> to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test >>> introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be >>> best to push everything together. >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ >>> HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ >>> Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html >>> >>> The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed >>> changing since there are differences in the available test library (no >>> ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, >>> though. >>> >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>> HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch >>> Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html >>> >>> Test fix. Same as in 9. >>> >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>> HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch >>> Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html >>> >>> Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used some >>> JDK 9 only features, such as >>> NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses() >>> >>> >>> Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can >>> push this via JPRT. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Severin >> > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Tue Feb 2 10:55:31 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 11:55:31 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1454410531.3494.6.camel@redhat.com> On Tue, 2016-02-02 at 11:42 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 2.2.2016 11:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi Sean, Jaroslav, > > > > On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > > Severin, > > > > > > this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new system > > > property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. > > > > Thanks for the heads-up. > > > > > Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this port ? > > > > Was there an answer that I've missed about this? > > Not yet. But, yes, I am going to file the CCC request. Thanks, Jaroslav! Cheers, Severin > -JB- > > > > > Thanks, > > Severin > > > > > Regards, > > > Sean. > > > > > > On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related > > > > to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test > > > > introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be > > > > best to push everything together. > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ > > > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ > > > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html > > > > > > > > The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed > > > > changing since there are differences in the available test library (no > > > > ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, > > > > though. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/ > > > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch > > > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html > > > > > > > > Test fix. Same as in 9. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/ > > > > HG export patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch > > > > Review-thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html > > > > > > > > Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used some > > > > JDK 9 only features, such as > > > > NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses() > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can > > > > push this via JPRT. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Severin > > > > > > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 11:10:36 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:10:36 +0100 Subject: Result: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo Message-ID: <56B08EAC.4000304@oracle.com> Voting for Zoltan Majo [1] is now closed. Yes: 17 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is sufficient to approve the nomination. Tobias Hartmann [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004810.html From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 11:14:10 2016 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 03:14:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8145388: URLConnection.guessContentTypeFromStream returns image/jpg for some JPEG images Message-ID: <962c8688-36bc-41ac-8d34-df5d720d13be@default> Hi, Please approve the backport of 8145388 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145388 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3f00e1b74464 JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037832.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling.[Only Copyright year has been updated manually]. Regards, Ramanand. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 11:28:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 11:28:39 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8145388: URLConnection.guessContentTypeFromStream returns image/jpg for some JPEG images In-Reply-To: <962c8688-36bc-41ac-8d34-df5d720d13be@default> References: <962c8688-36bc-41ac-8d34-df5d720d13be@default> Message-ID: <56B092E7.2070800@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 02/02/2016 11:14, Ramanand Patil wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve the backport of 8145388 to 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145388 > > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3f00e1b74464 > > JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037832.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling.[Only Copyright year has been updated manually]. > > > Regards, > > Ramanand. > > From aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 12:20:18 2016 From: aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 15:20:18 +0300 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings In-Reply-To: <56AF6DD9.5070802@oracle.com> References: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> <56AF6DD9.5070802@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B09F02.50803@oracle.com> Thank you, pushed to jdk8-dev: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148842 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/rev/efe013052465 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/2cdb8c0719ad But, did I push it right? It got "Fix Versions: 8u82", while I expected 8u76. Have we forked 8u76 already? Cheers, -Aleksey On 02/01/2016 05:38 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved for jdk8u-dev. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 01/02/16 14:26, Roger Riggs wrote: >> +1 >> >> On 2/1/2016 7:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to backport a simple performance optimization to 8u: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059677 >>> >>> This change was in JDK 9 for at least a year now, and no problems were >>> apparently discovered. The change comes in two parts: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/9dc4d4fc73ca >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0bddfc90d139 >>> >>> Review thread: >>> >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029569.html >>> >>> >>> Note that Roger had specific concerns about backporting, which seem >>> unproblematic: >>> >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029589.html >>> >>> >>> JDK part applies without problems, and HS part needs some fuzz in >>> vm/runtime/thread.cpp. These are the proposed webrevs against 8u, for >>> convenience: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.hs/ >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.jdk/ >>> >>> I re-ran full JPRT against 8u with this change, and it was clean. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Aleksey >>> >>> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 13:39:09 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:39:09 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings In-Reply-To: <56B09F02.50803@oracle.com> References: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> <56AF6DD9.5070802@oracle.com> <56B09F02.50803@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B0B17D.7070909@oracle.com> On 02/02/2016 12:20, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > Thank you, pushed to jdk8-dev: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148842 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/rev/efe013052465 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/2cdb8c0719ad > > But, did I push it right? It got "Fix Versions: 8u82", while I expected > 8u76. Have we forked 8u76 already? Correct. RDP2 happened at the end of January. See : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004762.html If you've a strong request for 8u76 inclusion, then you can follow the post RDP2 request process to propose it. regards, Sean. > > Cheers, > -Aleksey > > On 02/01/2016 05:38 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Approved for jdk8u-dev. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 01/02/16 14:26, Roger Riggs wrote: >>> +1 >>> >>> On 2/1/2016 7:05 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I would like to backport a simple performance optimization to 8u: >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059677 >>>> >>>> This change was in JDK 9 for at least a year now, and no problems were >>>> apparently discovered. The change comes in two parts: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/9dc4d4fc73ca >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0bddfc90d139 >>>> >>>> Review thread: >>>> >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029569.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Note that Roger had specific concerns about backporting, which seem >>>> unproblematic: >>>> >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2014-November/029589.html >>>> >>>> >>>> JDK part applies without problems, and HS part needs some fuzz in >>>> vm/runtime/thread.cpp. These are the proposed webrevs against 8u, for >>>> convenience: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.hs/ >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8059677/8u/webrev.01.jdk/ >>>> >>>> I re-ran full JPRT against 8u with this change, and it was clean. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Aleksey >>>> >>>> > From aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 14:12:32 2016 From: aleksey.shipilev at oracle.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:12:32 +0300 Subject: [8u] RFA (S) 8059677: Thread.getName() instantiates Strings In-Reply-To: <56B0B17D.7070909@oracle.com> References: <56AF4A12.5050305@oracle.com> <56AF6B05.2020701@Oracle.com> <56AF6DD9.5070802@oracle.com> <56B09F02.50803@oracle.com> <56B0B17D.7070909@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B0B950.5000300@oracle.com> On 02/02/2016 04:39 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > On 02/02/2016 12:20, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Thank you, pushed to jdk8-dev: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148842 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/rev/efe013052465 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/2cdb8c0719ad >> >> But, did I push it right? It got "Fix Versions: 8u82", while I expected >> 8u76. Have we forked 8u76 already? > Correct. RDP2 happened at the end of January. See : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004762.html Ah, missed that one. Oh well. > If you've a strong request for 8u76 inclusion, then you can follow the > post RDP2 request process to propose it. No, I don't have a strong case for 8u76. Thanks, -Aleksey From anton.litvinov at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 17:25:49 2016 From: anton.litvinov at oracle.com (Anton Litvinov) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 20:25:49 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8139581: AWT components are not drawn after removal and addition to a container Message-ID: <56B0E69D.9030003@oracle.com> Hello, I would like to request for approval to push a backport of the fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The backport fix is identical to the original fix. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139581 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/55a81cfbe8be JDK 9 review thread: Approval 1 - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-February/010631.html Approval 2 - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-February/010634.html Reviewers: ssadetsky, alexsch The patch from JDK 9 applies cleanly after correction of a file path. Thank you, Anton From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 17:58:08 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:58:08 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8139581: AWT components are not drawn after removal and addition to a container In-Reply-To: <56B0E69D.9030003@oracle.com> References: <56B0E69D.9030003@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B0EE30.7040809@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 02/02/16 17:25, Anton Litvinov wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to request for approval to push a backport of the fix from > JDK 9 to JDK 8. The backport fix is identical to the original fix. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139581 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/55a81cfbe8be > JDK 9 review thread: > Approval 1 - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-February/010631.html > Approval 2 - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-February/010634.html > Reviewers: ssadetsky, alexsch > > The patch from JDK 9 applies cleanly after correction of a file path. > > Thank you, > Anton From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 18:52:24 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:52:24 +0000 Subject: [8u Communication] JDK 8u82 timeline Message-ID: <56B0FAE8.90406@oracle.com> I've published a proposal for the key milestone dates relating to the 8u82 release: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u82.html Jan 2016 8u-dev forests begin collecting 8u76 fixes (completed) April 2016 RampDown 2 (Fork for the stabilization forests) July 2016 GA Note that these timelines are preliminary only and are subject to change. Please refer to the JDK 8 milestones definition page [1] for a summary of what each milestone consists of. Please submit feedback by Friday the 5th of January 2016. Thanks, -Rob From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 2 19:02:37 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 19:02:37 +0000 Subject: [8u Communication] JDK 8u82 timeline In-Reply-To: <56B0FAE8.90406@oracle.com> References: <56B0FAE8.90406@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B0FD4D.3080108@oracle.com> Ahem. That should read "8u-dev forest begins collecting 8u82 fixes" and "feedback should be received by the 5th of *February*". Clearly time to step away from the keyboard. -Rob On 02/02/16 18:52, Rob McKenna wrote: > I've published a proposal for the key milestone dates relating to the > 8u82 release: > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u82.html > > Jan 2016 8u-dev forests begin collecting 8u76 fixes (completed) > April 2016 RampDown 2 (Fork for the stabilization forests) > July 2016 GA > > Note that these timelines are preliminary only and are subject to > change. Please refer to the JDK 8 milestones definition page [1] for a > summary of what each milestone consists of. Please submit feedback by > Friday the 5th of January 2016. > > Thanks, > > -Rob From boris.molodenkov at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 14:17:06 2016 From: boris.molodenkov at oracle.com (Boris Molodenkov) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 17:17:06 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8134963 Message-ID: <56B20BE2.7080403@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport JDK-8134963to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK9 is almost the same. Just test header was slightly adapted to JDK8: 35,36c35 < * @modules java.base/sun.misc < * @library /testlibrary /test/lib --- > * @library /testlibrary /testlibrary/whitebox Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134963 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/af014cb82e42 Review thread for original fix: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/016330.html Thanks, Boris From anton.litvinov at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 14:21:57 2016 From: anton.litvinov at oracle.com (Anton Litvinov) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 17:21:57 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8130735: javax.swing.TimerQueue: timer fires late when another timer starts Message-ID: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> Hello, I would like to request for approval to push a straight backport of the fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The patch from JDK 9 applies well to JDK 8 after correction of a file path. Please note that the author of the fix Semyon Sadetsky and two reviewers of the fix Alexander Scherbatiy, Sergey Bylokhov are added to Cc: of this message. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130735 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/5eca1e6a1236 JDK 9 review thread: Approval 1 - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004688.html Approval 2 - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004689.html Reviewers: alexsch, serb, azvegint Thank you, Anton From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 15:02:10 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:02:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8134963 In-Reply-To: <56B20BE2.7080403@oracle.com> References: <56B20BE2.7080403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B21672.6050201@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 03/02/16 14:17, Boris Molodenkov wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to backport JDK-8134963to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK9 is almost the same. > Just test header was slightly adapted to JDK8: > 35,36c35 > < * @modules java.base/sun.misc > < * @library /testlibrary /test/lib > --- > > * @library /testlibrary /testlibrary/whitebox > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134963 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/af014cb82e42 > Review thread for original fix: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/016330.html > > > Thanks, > Boris > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 15:02:28 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:02:28 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8130735: javax.swing.TimerQueue: timer fires late when another timer starts In-Reply-To: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> References: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B21684.20507@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 03/02/16 14:21, Anton Litvinov wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to request for approval to push a straight backport of the > fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The patch from JDK 9 applies well to JDK 8 > after correction of a file path. > > Please note that the author of the fix Semyon Sadetsky and two reviewers > of the fix Alexander Scherbatiy, Sergey Bylokhov are added to Cc: of > this message. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130735 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/5eca1e6a1236 > JDK 9 review thread: > Approval 1 - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004688.html > Approval 2 - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004689.html > Reviewers: alexsch, serb, azvegint > > Thank you, > Anton From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 15:03:42 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:03:42 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8130735: javax.swing.TimerQueue: timer fires late when another timer starts In-Reply-To: <56B21684.20507@oracle.com> References: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> <56B21684.20507@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B216CE.6080100@oracle.com> Actually, is there a reason this doesn't have a test? If not, please add one. If so, please add a noreg label. -Rob On 03/02/16 15:02, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved > > -Rob > > On 03/02/16 14:21, Anton Litvinov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I would like to request for approval to push a straight backport of the >> fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The patch from JDK 9 applies well to JDK 8 >> after correction of a file path. >> >> Please note that the author of the fix Semyon Sadetsky and two reviewers >> of the fix Alexander Scherbatiy, Sergey Bylokhov are added to Cc: of >> this message. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130735 >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/5eca1e6a1236 >> JDK 9 review thread: >> Approval 1 - >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004688.html >> Approval 2 - >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004689.html >> Reviewers: alexsch, serb, azvegint >> >> Thank you, >> Anton From anton.litvinov at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 15:31:39 2016 From: anton.litvinov at oracle.com (Anton Litvinov) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 18:31:39 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8130735: javax.swing.TimerQueue: timer fires late when another timer starts In-Reply-To: <56B216CE.6080100@oracle.com> References: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> <56B21684.20507@oracle.com> <56B216CE.6080100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B21D5B.6070303@oracle.com> Hello Rob, Thank you for approval for push of this backport fix. Yes, there is a reason of absence of the regression test in the original fix. Originally the author of the fix had intention to mark the bug with "noreg-hard" label, but, probably, occasionally it was not marked. Please find the phrase "it is hard to write a stable test scenario, so the bug is labeled noreg-hard" in the next e-mail from the review thread. I would like to inform you that "noreg-hard" label has just been added to the bug record. E-mail from the review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004686.html Thank you, Anton On 2/3/2016 6:03 PM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Actually, is there a reason this doesn't have a test? If not, please > add one. If so, please add a noreg label. > > -Rob > > On 03/02/16 15:02, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Approved >> >> -Rob >> >> On 03/02/16 14:21, Anton Litvinov wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I would like to request for approval to push a straight backport of the >>> fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The patch from JDK 9 applies well to JDK 8 >>> after correction of a file path. >>> >>> Please note that the author of the fix Semyon Sadetsky and two >>> reviewers >>> of the fix Alexander Scherbatiy, Sergey Bylokhov are added to Cc: of >>> this message. >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130735 >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/5eca1e6a1236 >>> JDK 9 review thread: >>> Approval 1 - >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004688.html >>> Approval 2 - >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004689.html >>> Reviewers: alexsch, serb, azvegint >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Anton From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 15:57:30 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:57:30 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8130735: javax.swing.TimerQueue: timer fires late when another timer starts In-Reply-To: <56B21D5B.6070303@oracle.com> References: <56B20D05.6030303@oracle.com> <56B21684.20507@oracle.com> <56B216CE.6080100@oracle.com> <56B21D5B.6070303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B2236A.6080304@oracle.com> Thanks Anton, -Rob On 03/02/16 15:31, Anton Litvinov wrote: > Hello Rob, > > Thank you for approval for push of this backport fix. Yes, there is a > reason of absence of the regression test in the original fix. Originally > the author of the fix had intention to mark the bug with "noreg-hard" > label, but, probably, occasionally it was not marked. Please find the > phrase > > "it is hard to write a stable test scenario, so the bug is labeled > noreg-hard" > > in the next e-mail from the review thread. I would like to inform you > that "noreg-hard" label has just been added to the bug record. > E-mail from the review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004686.html > > Thank you, > Anton > > On 2/3/2016 6:03 PM, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Actually, is there a reason this doesn't have a test? If not, please >> add one. If so, please add a noreg label. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 03/02/16 15:02, Rob McKenna wrote: >>> Approved >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On 03/02/16 14:21, Anton Litvinov wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I would like to request for approval to push a straight backport of the >>>> fix from JDK 9 to JDK 8. The patch from JDK 9 applies well to JDK 8 >>>> after correction of a file path. >>>> >>>> Please note that the author of the fix Semyon Sadetsky and two >>>> reviewers >>>> of the fix Alexander Scherbatiy, Sergey Bylokhov are added to Cc: of >>>> this message. >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130735 >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/5eca1e6a1236 >>>> JDK 9 review thread: >>>> Approval 1 - >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004688.html >>>> Approval 2 - >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2015-July/004689.html >>>> Reviewers: alexsch, serb, azvegint >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Anton > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 3 18:04:03 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 18:04:03 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> On 28/01/16 16:10, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 01/28/2016 03:21 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development >> forests, I'd like to propose that the jdk8u/hs-dev forest be deleted. > All of us have, from time to time, done software archaeology in order > to discover when a change was made. By definition you cannot know > when this might be needed. In my opinion it would make sense to > archive this somewhere. Question around this Andrew. All of the edits and commits that were made in hs-dev are sync'ed to the master jdk8u forest. That's the standard team to master sync process that the JDK Updates Projects use. Nothing should be lost. Is the master forest sufficient for your archaeology needs or am I missing something ? regards, Sean. > > Andrew. > From volker.simonis at gmail.com Thu Feb 4 08:04:41 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 09:04:41 +0100 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > On 28/01/16 16:10, Andrew Haley wrote: >> >> On 01/28/2016 03:21 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> >>> To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development >>> forests, I'd like to propose that the jdk8u/hs-dev forest be deleted. >> >> All of us have, from time to time, done software archaeology in order >> to discover when a change was made. By definition you cannot know >> when this might be needed. In my opinion it would make sense to >> archive this somewhere. > > Question around this Andrew. All of the edits and commits that were made in > hs-dev are sync'ed to the master jdk8u forest. That's the standard team to > master sync process that the JDK Updates Projects use. > > Nothing should be lost. Is the master forest sufficient for your archaeology > needs or am I missing something ? > Andrew may refer to broken links from JBS which point to the jdk8u/hs-dev repository. I think this is mostly a "convenience problem" and unfortunately we already have this problem with numerous other deleted forests (e.g. hsx). The solution is relatively simple (just replace jdk8u/hs-dev by jdk8u/dev in the link because the change id remains stable) but people not so familiar with Mercurial/OpenJDK probably don't know this and get a "bad impression" because links from JBS point to nowhere. Maybe we can establish some http-redirection at hg.openjdk.java.net to automatically redirect request from deleted repositories to existing ones? Regards, Volker > regards, > Sean. >> >> >> Andrew. >> > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Thu Feb 4 10:23:13 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 11:23:13 +0100 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1454581393.3499.1.camel@redhat.com> On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 09:04 +0100, Volker Simonis wrote: > Andrew may refer to broken links from JBS which point to the > jdk8u/hs-dev repository. I think this is mostly a "convenience > problem" and unfortunately we already have this problem with numerous > other deleted forests (e.g. hsx). The solution is relatively simple > (just replace jdk8u/hs-dev by jdk8u/dev in the link because the change > id remains stable) but people not so familiar with Mercurial/OpenJDK > probably don't know this and get a "bad impression" because links from > JBS point to nowhere. > > Maybe we can establish some http-redirection at hg.openjdk.java.net to > automatically redirect request from deleted repositories to existing > ones? +1 Cheers, Severin From chris.hegarty at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 10:36:28 2016 From: chris.hegarty at oracle.com (Chris Hegarty) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 10:36:28 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: <1454581393.3499.1.camel@redhat.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> <1454581393.3499.1.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56B329AC.1050207@oracle.com> On 04/02/16 10:23, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 09:04 +0100, Volker Simonis wrote: >> Andrew may refer to broken links from JBS which point to the >> jdk8u/hs-dev repository. I think this is mostly a "convenience >> problem" and unfortunately we already have this problem with numerous >> other deleted forests (e.g. hsx). The solution is relatively simple >> (just replace jdk8u/hs-dev by jdk8u/dev in the link because the change >> id remains stable) but people not so familiar with Mercurial/OpenJDK >> probably don't know this and get a "bad impression" because links from >> JBS point to nowhere. >> >> Maybe we can establish some http-redirection at hg.openjdk.java.net to >> automatically redirect request from deleted repositories to existing >> ones? > > +1 This would be convenient, but I'm not sure how necessary. All JIRA issues updated by hgupdater should contain a comment with a URL to the changeset in the master forest. Yes, there are previous comments with URLs to changesets in development forests which may no longer exist, but you should always be able to find the master. Unless I'm missing something related to the 8u development flow? -Chris. From aph at redhat.com Thu Feb 4 10:37:03 2016 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 10:37:03 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> <56B24113.9040403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B329CF.4020800@redhat.com> On 03/02/16 18:04, Se?n Coffey wrote: > On 28/01/16 16:10, Andrew Haley wrote: >> On 01/28/2016 03:21 PM, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development >>> forests, I'd like to propose that the jdk8u/hs-dev forest be deleted. >> All of us have, from time to time, done software archaeology in order >> to discover when a change was made. By definition you cannot know >> when this might be needed. In my opinion it would make sense to >> archive this somewhere. > Question around this Andrew. All of the edits and commits that were made > in hs-dev are sync'ed to the master jdk8u forest. That's the standard > team to master sync process that the JDK Updates Projects use. > > Nothing should be lost. Is the master forest sufficient for your > archaeology needs or am I missing something ? I guess it would be sufficient, although there might be some dangling URLs. Deleting anything makes me nervous, but I suppose this is benign. Andrew. From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 13:15:27 2016 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (Sundararajan Athijegannathan) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 18:45:27 +0530 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148926: Call site profiling fails on braces-wrapped anonymous function Message-ID: <56B34EEF.4040902@oracle.com> Please approve. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148926 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005923.html jdk8u backport webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148926/8u/ Backported 'as is' except for the modular layout difference. Thanks -Sundar From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 14:06:18 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 14:06:18 +0000 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148926: Call site profiling fails on braces-wrapped anonymous function In-Reply-To: <56B34EEF.4040902@oracle.com> References: <56B34EEF.4040902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B35ADA.7020307@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 04/02/16 13:15, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: > Please approve. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148926 > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005923.html > > jdk8u backport webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148926/8u/ > > Backported 'as is' except for the modular layout difference. > > Thanks > -Sundar From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 15:29:04 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:29:04 +0100 Subject: Reult: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B36E40.6080107@oracle.com> Voting for Thomas Schatzl is now closed. Yes: 10 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is sufficient to approve the nomination. Bengt Rutisson On 2016-01-21 10:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: > > I hereby nominate Thomas Schatzl to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Thomas Schatzl is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project. Thomas has 109 commits in the JDK 8u > project [3]. > > Votes are due by 11:00 AM CET, Thursday, February 4, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8 Updates Reviewers [1] are eligible to vote > on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying > to this mailing list. > > For Three-Vote Consensus voting instructions, see [2]. > > Bengt Rutisson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/log?revcount=1000&rev=author%28%22tschatzl%22%29+and+not+merge%28%29 > From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 15:29:44 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:29:44 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B36E68.4000600@oracle.com> Voting for Mikael Gerdin is now closed. Yes: 10 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is sufficient to approve the nomination. Bengt Rutisson On 2016-01-21 10:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: > > I hereby nominate Mikael Gerdin to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Mikael Gerdin is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer and a Reviewer > in the JDK 9 Project. Mikael has 56 commits in the JDK 8u project [3]. > > Votes are due by 11:00 AM CET, Thursday, February 4, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8 Updates Reviewers [1] are eligible to vote > on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying > to this mailing list. > > For Three-Vote Consensus voting instructions, see [2]. > > Bengt Rutisson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/log?revcount=1000&rev=author%28%22mgerdin%22%29+and+not+merge%28%29 > From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 15:30:37 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:30:37 +0100 Subject: Result: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B36E9D.9070509@oracle.com> Voting for Erik Helin is now closed. Yes: 10 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is sufficient to approve the nomination. Bengt Rutisson On 2016-01-21 10:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: > > I hereby nominate Erik Helin to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Erik Helin is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer and a Reviewer in > the JDK 9 Project. Erik has 46 commits in the JDK 8u project [3]. > > Votes are due by 11:00 AM CET, Thursday, February 4, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8 Updates Reviewers [1] are eligible to vote > on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying > to this mailing list. > > For Three-Vote Consensus voting instructions, see [2]. > > Bengt Rutisson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/log?revcount=1000&rev=author%28%22ehelin%22%29+and+not+merge%28%29 From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 15:31:41 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 16:31:41 +0100 Subject: Result: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56B36E68.4000600@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> <56B36E68.4000600@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B36EDD.2080902@oracle.com> (Correct title of the email.) On 2016-02-04 16:29, Bengt Rutisson wrote: > > Voting for Mikael Gerdin is now closed. > > Yes: 10 > Veto: 0 > Abstain: 0 > > According to the Bylaws definition of Three-Vote Consensus, this is > sufficient to approve the nomination. > > Bengt Rutisson > > > On 2016-01-21 10:15, Bengt Rutisson wrote: >> >> I hereby nominate Mikael Gerdin to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. >> >> Mikael Gerdin is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer and a >> Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project. Mikael has 56 commits in the JDK 8u >> project [3]. >> >> Votes are due by 11:00 AM CET, Thursday, February 4, 2016. >> >> Only current JDK 8 Updates Reviewers [1] are eligible to vote >> on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying >> to this mailing list. >> >> For Three-Vote Consensus voting instructions, see [2]. >> >> Bengt Rutisson >> >> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census >> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote >> [3] >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/hotspot/log?revcount=1000&rev=author%28%22mgerdin%22%29+and+not+merge%28%29 >> > From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 21:00:24 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 00:00:24 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8144593: Suppress not recognized property/feature warning messages from SAXParser Message-ID: <56B3BBE8.5060705@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve JDK-8144593 backport to JDK8u-dev. JAXP source fix applies cleanly after reshuffling. Two new tests were moved to JDK repo with minor,non-functional modifications (JTREG tags and tests package name was removed). Testing shows no related test failures. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144593 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/6aa83d55614a Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038595.html Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8144593/8/00/ With Best Regards, Aleksej From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Feb 4 22:19:48 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 01:19:48 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8072081: Supplementary characters are rejected in comments Message-ID: <56B3CE84.30500@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve JDK-8072081 backport to JDK8u-dev. Source fix applies cleanly after reshuffling. Minor difference: new test was moved to JDK repo. Testing shows no related test failures. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072081 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/a549eb34d37e Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037455.html Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8072081/8/00/ With Best Regards, Aleksej From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 5 02:02:31 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 02:02:31 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8144593: Suppress not recognized property/feature warning messages from SAXParser In-Reply-To: <56B3BBE8.5060705@oracle.com> References: <56B3BBE8.5060705@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B402B7.4010609@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 04/02/16 21:00, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > Please, approve JDK-8144593 backport to JDK8u-dev. JAXP source fix > applies cleanly after reshuffling. > Two new tests were moved to JDK repo with minor,non-functional > modifications (JTREG tags and tests package name was removed). > Testing shows no related test failures. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144593 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/6aa83d55614a > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038595.html > > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8144593/8/00/ > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 5 02:02:38 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 02:02:38 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8072081: Supplementary characters are rejected in comments In-Reply-To: <56B3CE84.30500@oracle.com> References: <56B3CE84.30500@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B402BE.6090904@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 04/02/16 22:19, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > Please, approve JDK-8072081 backport to JDK8u-dev. > Source fix applies cleanly after reshuffling. > Minor difference: new test was moved to JDK repo. > Testing shows no related test failures. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072081 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/a549eb34d37e > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-December/037455.html > > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8072081/8/00/ > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Feb 5 22:24:08 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 17:24:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u Communication] JDK 8u82 timeline In-Reply-To: <56B0FD4D.3080108@oracle.com> References: <56B0FAE8.90406@oracle.com> <56B0FD4D.3080108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1817798961.17392083.1454711048392.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Ahem. That should read "8u-dev forest begins collecting 8u82 fixes" and > "feedback should be received by the 5th of *February*". > > Clearly time to step away from the keyboard. > No stabilization forests any more either. :-) > -Rob > > On 02/02/16 18:52, Rob McKenna wrote: > > I've published a proposal for the key milestone dates relating to the > > 8u82 release: > > > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u82.html > > > > Jan 2016 8u-dev forests begin collecting 8u76 fixes (completed) > > April 2016 RampDown 2 (Fork for the stabilization forests) > > July 2016 GA > > > > Note that these timelines are preliminary only and are subject to > > change. Please refer to the JDK 8 milestones definition page [1] for a > > summary of what each milestone consists of. Please submit feedback by > > Friday the 5th of January 2016. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Rob > -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: ed25519/35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222 From michael.haupt at oracle.com Mon Feb 8 16:51:37 2016 From: michael.haupt at oracle.com (Michael Haupt) Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 17:51:37 +0100 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8149334: JSON.parse(JSON.stringify([])).push(10) creates an array containing two elements Message-ID: <15EC4C4C-0C09-4F10-8389-C953C216386C@oracle.com> Dear all, please approve the backport of the following patch to 8u. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149334 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005938.html 8u backport webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8149334-8u/webrev.00/ The JDK 9 patch applied cleanly after path adaption. Thanks, Michael -- Dr. Michael Haupt | Principal Member of Technical Staff Phone: +49 331 200 7277 | Fax: +49 331 200 7561 Oracle Java Platform Group | LangTools Team | Nashorn Oracle Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Schiffbauergasse 14 | 14467 Potsdam, Germany ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Hauptverwaltung: Riesstra?e 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. | Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Nederland, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 8 17:08:58 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 17:08:58 +0000 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8149334: JSON.parse(JSON.stringify([])).push(10) creates an array containing two elements In-Reply-To: <15EC4C4C-0C09-4F10-8389-C953C216386C@oracle.com> References: <15EC4C4C-0C09-4F10-8389-C953C216386C@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56B8CBAA.7060703@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 08/02/16 16:51, Michael Haupt wrote: > Dear all, > > please approve the backport of the following patch to 8u. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149334 > JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005938.html > 8u backport webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8149334-8u/webrev.00/ > > The JDK 9 patch applied cleanly after path adaption. > > Thanks, > > Michael > From bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 11:21:17 2016 From: bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com (Bhanu Gopularam) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 03:21:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8149029: Secure validation of XML based digital signature always enabled when checking wrapping attacks Message-ID: <162d8c0d-8f70-490d-b2a0-2cba36a812f2@default> Hi All, Please review fix for following bug : Bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149029 Issue - Secure validation is always enabled for XML based signature while checking wrapping attacks. The value of DOMValidateContext property org.jcp.xml.dsig.secureValidation is ignored during processing of XML based signature. Solution - We need to pass the value of secureValidation flag In dereference(URIreference, XMLCryptoContext) method of org/jcp/xml/dsig/internal/dom/DOMURIDereferencer.java during call apacheResolver.resolve method. Webrev - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8149029/ Thanks, Bhanu From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 13:27:55 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 22:27:55 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8149029: Secure validation of XML based digital signature always enabled when checking wrapping attacks In-Reply-To: <162d8c0d-8f70-490d-b2a0-2cba36a812f2@default> References: <162d8c0d-8f70-490d-b2a0-2cba36a812f2@default> Message-ID: <56BB3ADB.7040603@oracle.com> approved pending successful code review If code review takes place on another OpenJDK alias, please post a link to the review thread on this alias before pushing. Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/10 20:21, Bhanu Gopularam wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Please review fix for following bug : > > > > Bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149029 > > > > Issue - Secure validation is always enabled for XML based signature while checking wrapping attacks. The value of DOMValidateContext property org.jcp.xml.dsig.secureValidation is ignored during processing of XML based signature. > > > > Solution - We need to pass the value of secureValidation flag In dereference(URIreference, XMLCryptoContext) method of org/jcp/xml/dsig/internal/dom/DOMURIDereferencer.java during call apacheResolver.resolve method. > > > > Webrev - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8149029/ > > > > Thanks, > > Bhanu > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 13:57:05 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 16:57:05 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8046339: sun.rmi.transport.DGCAckHandler leaks memory Message-ID: <56BB41B1.4050109@oracle.com> Hello! I'd like to backport this simple yet useful fix to jdk8u. The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. Would you please approve? Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046339 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/18751144d0fc Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038723.html Sincerely yours, Ivan From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 14:00:48 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 23:00:48 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8046339: sun.rmi.transport.DGCAckHandler leaks memory In-Reply-To: <56BB41B1.4050109@oracle.com> References: <56BB41B1.4050109@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BB4290.4040109@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/10 22:57, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > I'd like to backport this simple yet useful fix to jdk8u. > The patch applies cleanly after unshuffling. > > Would you please approve? > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046339 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/18751144d0fc > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038723.html > > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan > From sean.mullan at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 15:48:32 2016 From: sean.mullan at oracle.com (Sean Mullan) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:48:32 -0500 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 8149029: Secure validation of XML based digital signature always enabled when checking wrapping attacks In-Reply-To: <162d8c0d-8f70-490d-b2a0-2cba36a812f2@default> References: <162d8c0d-8f70-490d-b2a0-2cba36a812f2@default> Message-ID: <56BB5BD0.60309@oracle.com> The fix looks fine to me. --Sean On 02/10/2016 06:21 AM, Bhanu Gopularam wrote: > Hi All, > > Please review fix for following bug : > > Bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149029 > > Issue ? Secure validation is always enabled for XML based signature > while checking wrapping attacks. The value of DOMValidateContext > property org.jcp.xml.dsig.secureValidation is ignored during processing > of XML based signature. > > Solution - We need to pass the value of secureValidation flag In > dereference(URIreference, XMLCryptoContext) method of > org/jcp/xml/dsig/internal/dom/DOMURIDereferencer.java during call > apacheResolver.resolve method. > > Webrev - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8149029/ > > Thanks, > > Bhanu > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 16:48:38 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 19:48:38 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8059661: Test SoftReference and OOM behavior In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BB69E6.3070205@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8059661 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059661) The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. But it was slightly changed: it uses standard java.util.Random() instead of Utils.getRandomInstance(), because JDK-8044186 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186) is not backported to JDK 8 yet. Also, it contains one-line fix for JDK-8065865 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065865). Fix for JDK-8059661 could not be compiled without it. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/18f7ade7de0d JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2014-October/010977.html Thanks, Alexander From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 18:01:33 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 19:01:33 +0100 Subject: Fwd: Re: [8u] RFR: 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56BB758D.7070109@oracle.com> References: <56BB758D.7070109@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BB7AFD.4090800@oracle.com> [Adding jdk8u-dev list] Hi, I believe I need an 8u Reviewer as well, since Dmitry is only committer for 8u? Could someone please take a look? This is type cleanup for dumping a heap with long arrays. Hotspot webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/hotspot/ JDK webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/jdk/ See below for changes compared to the JDK 9 version. Regards, Andreas -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [8u] RFR: 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 20:38:21 +0300 From: Dmitry Samersoff To: Andreas Eriksson , serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net Andreas, Looks good for me! -Dmitry On 2016-01-28 20:36, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > Please review this backport of JDK-8129419 > . > > Hotspot webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/hotspot/ > JDK webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/jdk/ > > There are three changes compared to JDK 9: > > 1) The hprof parser is in the JDK repo instead of top repo. > Otherwise these changes are the same. > > 2) On Solaris os::write has some UseVMInterruptibleIO logic that failed > because it assumed it was called by a JavaThread. > I changed it to skip UseVMInterruptibleIO logic if called by a > non-JavaThread. > > 3) The "heap dump file created" message were using sprintf and pragmas > because of legacy reasons. > Code after the change is the same as JDK 9 code. > > Regards, > Andreas -- Dmitry Samersoff Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 10 18:14:01 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 18:14:01 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8059661: Test SoftReference and OOM behavior In-Reply-To: <56BB69E6.3070205@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56BB69E6.3070205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BB7DE9.6020709@oracle.com> Alexander, On 10/02/16 16:48, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8059661 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059661) > > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > But it was slightly changed: So it doesn't apply cleanly then. Can you post your webrev ? Also - are you committing fixes from below bug IDs also? Will you list them in the changeset and approval request ? regards, Sean. > it uses standard java.util.Random() instead of > Utils.getRandomInstance(), because JDK-8044186 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186) is not backported > to JDK 8 yet. > Also, it contains one-line fix for JDK-8065865 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065865). Fix for > JDK-8059661 could not be compiled without it. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/18f7ade7de0d > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2014-October/010977.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Thu Feb 11 12:11:53 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 15:11:53 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8059661: Test SoftReference and OOM behavior In-Reply-To: <56BB7DE9.6020709@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56BB69E6.3070205@oracle.com> <56BB7DE9.6020709@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BC7A89.4040402@oracle.com> Here is webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8059661/webrev.00/ About https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186 - I'll probably backport it too, but later. Because this fix affects many tests besides this one. Also, JDK-8044186 does not affect functionality of TestSoftReferencesBehaviorOnOOME so it really can wait some time. For your information, all the difference between my patch and original patch from JDK-8059661 is: 29c29 < * @build TestSoftReference --- > * @build TestSoftReferencesBehaviorOnOOME - it could not be compiled without it, JDK-8065865 33a34 > import java.util.*; 37d37 < import java.util.Random; 41c41 < private static final Random rndGenerator = Utils.getRandomInstance(); --- > private static final Random rndGenerator = new Random(); On 10.02.2016 21:14, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Alexander, > > On 10/02/16 16:48, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8059661 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059661) >> >> The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >> But it was slightly changed: > So it doesn't apply cleanly then. Can you post your webrev ? > > Also - are you committing fixes from below bug IDs also? Will you list > them in the changeset and approval request ? > > regards, > Sean. >> it uses standard java.util.Random() instead of >> Utils.getRandomInstance(), because JDK-8044186 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186) is not backported >> to JDK 8 yet. >> Also, it contains one-line fix for JDK-8065865 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065865). Fix for >> JDK-8059661 could not be compiled without it. >> >> JDK 9 Changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/18f7ade7de0d >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2014-October/010977.html >> >> >> Thanks, >> Alexander >> >> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 11 12:38:59 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 12:38:59 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> Jaroslav has informed me that CCC has been approved for the JDK 8u port. Consider this request approved for jdk8u-dev as a result. On a side note, a docs sub-task should be created in the master bug to ensure docs get updated for this change. Regards, Sean. On 02/02/2016 10:42, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 2.2.2016 11:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >> Hi Sean, Jaroslav, >> >> On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Severin, >>> >>> this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new >>> system >>> property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. >> >> Thanks for the heads-up. >> >>> Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this >>> port ? >> >> Was there an answer that I've missed about this? > > Not yet. But, yes, I am going to file the CCC request. > > -JB- > >> >> Thanks, >> Severin >> >>> Regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related >>>> to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test >>>> introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be >>>> best to push everything together. >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ >>>> HG export patch: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ >>>> Review-thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html >>>> >>>> >>>> The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed >>>> changing since there are differences in the available test library (no >>>> ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, >>>> though. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>>> >>>> HG export patch: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch >>>> Review-thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Test fix. Same as in 9. >>>> >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>>> >>>> HG export patch: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch >>>> Review-thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used >>>> some >>>> JDK 9 only features, such as >>>> NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses() >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can >>>> push this via JPRT. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Severin >>> >> > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Thu Feb 11 13:36:15 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:36:15 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1455197775.3615.25.camel@redhat.com> On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 12:38 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Jaroslav has informed me that CCC has been approved for the JDK 8u port.? > Consider this request approved for jdk8u-dev as a result. Thanks Sean, Jaroslav! Jaroslav, would you be willing to push all the fixes together through JPRT for me? > On a side note, a docs sub-task should be created in the master bug to? > ensure docs get updated for this change. I'm not sure what this means. Shall I create that bug or somebody else? If me, how does this work? Thanks, Severin > Regards, > Sean. > > On 02/02/2016 10:42, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > > On 2.2.2016 11:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > Hi Sean, Jaroslav, > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > > > Severin, > > > > > > > > this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new? > > > > system > > > > property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. > > > > > > Thanks for the heads-up. > > > > > > > Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this? > > > > port ? > > > > > > Was there an answer that I've missed about this? > > > > Not yet. But, yes, I am going to file the CCC request. > > > > -JB- > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Severin > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Sean. > > > > > > > > On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related > > > > > to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test > > > > > introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be > > > > > best to push everything together. > > > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 > > > > > Webrev:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ > > > > > HG export patch:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ > > > > > Review-thread:? > > > > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed > > > > > changing since there are differences in the available test library (no > > > > > ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, > > > > > though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 > > > > > Webrev:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/? > > > > > > > > > > HG export patch:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch > > > > > Review-thread:? > > > > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Test fix. Same as in 9. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 > > > > > Webrev:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/? > > > > > > > > > > HG export patch:? > > > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch > > > > > Review-thread:? > > > > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used? > > > > > some > > > > > JDK 9 only features, such as > > > > > NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses()? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can > > > > > push this via JPRT. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Severin > > > > > > > > > > From alexey.ivanov at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 08:19:02 2016 From: alexey.ivanov at oracle.com (Alexey Ivanov) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 11:19:02 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc In-Reply-To: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> References: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: > Hello, > > Could you please review the fix for JDK-8147807 and approve push to > 8u-dev? > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147807 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8147807/jdk8/webrev.00/ > > The issue is not relevant to jdk 9. > > The fix just removes kcms service leaving lcms as the only option > which is the default in jdk8. > > > Thanks in advance, > Alexey From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 08:58:33 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:58:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8144957: Remove PICL warning message Message-ID: Hi All, Could somebody approve this clean backport into jdk8u-dev. JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144957 Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/0e6c867c8418 Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/017930.html Tested with jprt. Regards, Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 09:15:27 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 09:15:27 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc In-Reply-To: <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> References: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/2016 08:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: > I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... > > On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Could you please review the fix for JDK-8147807 and approve push to >> 8u-dev? >> >> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147807 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8147807/jdk8/webrev.00/ >> >> The issue is not relevant to jdk 9. >> >> The fix just removes kcms service leaving lcms as the only option >> which is the default in jdk8. >> >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Alexey > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 09:17:04 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 09:17:04 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8144957: Remove PICL warning message In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56BDA310.7090704@oracle.com> Approved. Please add a suitable noreg- label to master bug record. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/2016 08:58, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this clean backport into jdk8u-dev. > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144957 > > Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/0e6c867c8418 > > Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/017930.html > > > > Tested with jprt. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 11:25:19 2016 From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 12:25:19 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc In-Reply-To: <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> References: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDC11F.6000403@oracle.com> On 2016-02-12 10:15, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. Makefile change look good. /Magnus > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 12/02/2016 08:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >> I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... >> >> On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Could you please review the fix for JDK-8147807 and approve push to >>> 8u-dev? >>> >>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147807 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8147807/jdk8/webrev.00/ >>> >>> The issue is not relevant to jdk 9. >>> >>> The fix just removes kcms service leaving lcms as the only option >>> which is the default in jdk8. >>> >>> >>> Thanks in advance, >>> Alexey >> > From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 11:49:26 2016 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 03:49:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8148446: (tz) Support tzdata2016a Message-ID: Hi, Please approve the backport of 8148446 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149659 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ab2ab8a6f54c JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/i18n-dev/2016-February/001845.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling.(and ignoring the copyright year changes for TimeZoneNames) All the TZ related tests are passed. Regards, Ramanand. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 12:57:38 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 12:57:38 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8148446: (tz) Support tzdata2016a In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56BDD6C2.3060709@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/16 11:49, Ramanand Patil wrote: > Hi, > > > Please approve the backport of 8148446 to 8u-dev. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149659 > > > > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ab2ab8a6f54c > > > > JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/i18n-dev/2016-February/001845.html > > > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling.(and ignoring the copyright year changes for TimeZoneNames) > > > > All the TZ related tests are passed. > > > > > > Regards, > > Ramanand. > > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 14:05:20 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:05:20 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8034168: ThreadMXBean/Locks.java failed, blocked on wrong object In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDE6A0.5060801@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8034168 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034168) The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly but with 5 lines offset because of difference in jtreg annotations between JDK 9 test and JDK 8 test. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/2a905e17a975 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-February/014247.html Thanks, Alexander From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 14:07:40 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:07:40 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8034168: ThreadMXBean/Locks.java failed, blocked on wrong object In-Reply-To: <56BDE6A0.5060801@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56BDE6A0.5060801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDE72C.4000102@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/16 14:05, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8034168 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034168) > > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly but with 5 lines offset > because of difference in jtreg annotations between JDK 9 test and JDK > 8 test. > > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/2a905e17a975 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-February/014247.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 14:39:53 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:39:53 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8059661: Test SoftReference and OOM behavior In-Reply-To: <56BC7A89.4040402@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56BB69E6.3070205@oracle.com> <56BB7DE9.6020709@oracle.com> <56BC7A89.4040402@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDEEB9.9080507@oracle.com> Ok - thanks for the webrev and clarifications. Looks good! Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 11/02/16 12:11, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > Here is webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8059661/webrev.00/ > > About https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186 - I'll probably > backport it too, but later. Because this fix affects many tests > besides this one. Also, JDK-8044186 does not affect functionality of > TestSoftReferencesBehaviorOnOOME so it really can wait some time. > > For your information, all the difference between my patch and original > patch from JDK-8059661 is: > 29c29 > < * @build TestSoftReference > --- > > * @build TestSoftReferencesBehaviorOnOOME - it could not be > compiled without it, JDK-8065865 > > 33a34 > > import java.util.*; > 37d37 > < import java.util.Random; > 41c41 > < private static final Random rndGenerator = > Utils.getRandomInstance(); > --- > > private static final Random rndGenerator = new Random(); > > > > On 10.02.2016 21:14, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Alexander, >> >> On 10/02/16 16:48, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8059661 >>> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8059661) >>> >>> The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >>> But it was slightly changed: >> So it doesn't apply cleanly then. Can you post your webrev ? >> >> Also - are you committing fixes from below bug IDs also? Will you >> list them in the changeset and approval request ? >> >> regards, >> Sean. >>> it uses standard java.util.Random() instead of >>> Utils.getRandomInstance(), because JDK-8044186 >>> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044186) is not backported >>> to JDK 8 yet. >>> Also, it contains one-line fix for JDK-8065865 >>> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065865). Fix for >>> JDK-8059661 could not be compiled without it. >>> >>> JDK 9 Changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/18f7ade7de0d >>> JDK 9 review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2014-October/010977.html >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Alexander >>> >>> >>> >> > From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 14:50:13 2016 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:50:13 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8038963: com/sun/jdi tests fail because cygwin's ps sometimes misses processes Message-ID: <56BDF125.8050605@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8038963 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038963) The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly but some line numbers are different. The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8038963/webrev.00/ JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3b820c2913e8 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-April/014578.html Thanks, Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 14:56:54 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 14:56:54 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8038963: com/sun/jdi tests fail because cygwin's ps sometimes misses processes In-Reply-To: <56BDF125.8050605@oracle.com> References: <56BDF125.8050605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BDF2B6.80301@oracle.com> Looks good. Approved. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/16 14:50, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8038963 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8038963) > > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly but some line numbers are > different. > > The webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8038963/webrev.00/ > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3b820c2913e8 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-April/014578.html > > > Thanks, > Konstantin > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 18:51:13 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 21:51:13 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8081778: Use Intel x64 CPU instructions for RSA acceleration Message-ID: <56BE29A1.1040207@oracle.com> Hello! I'm seeking an approval to backport this performance enhancement to jdk8u-dev. The change applies *almost* cleanly. The only change I had to make was adding the extra argument to the 'new' operator, which is required in jdk8, but not jdk9. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081778 Jdk9 hotspot change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/578f086f3435 Jdk9 jdk change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/de309dbe42bf Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-May/018106.html The changes, comparing to jdk9 are in hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/library_call.cpp at lines #5956 and #5964; Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8081778/00/webrev/ Patched Jdk was successfully built and tested on all supported platforms. Would you please approve this backport? Sincerely yours, Ivan From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Fri Feb 12 19:20:54 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 11:20:54 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8081778: Use Intel x64 CPU instructions for RSA acceleration In-Reply-To: <56BE29A1.1040207@oracle.com> References: <56BE29A1.1040207@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56BE3096.8010808@oracle.com> 8u changes looks good. Thanks, Vladimir On 2/12/16 10:51 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > I'm seeking an approval to backport this performance enhancement to jdk8u-dev. > The change applies *almost* cleanly. > The only change I had to make was adding the extra argument to the 'new' operator, which is required in jdk8, but not jdk9. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081778 > Jdk9 hotspot change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/578f086f3435 > Jdk9 jdk change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/de309dbe42bf > Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-May/018106.html > > The changes, comparing to jdk9 are in > hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/library_call.cpp at lines #5956 and #5964; > > Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8081778/00/webrev/ > > Patched Jdk was successfully built and tested on all supported platforms. > > Would you please approve this backport? > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan > > > From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 09:02:23 2016 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:02:23 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc In-Reply-To: <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> References: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C1941F.3040900@oracle.com> Looks good. /Erik On 2016-02-12 10:15, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 12/02/2016 08:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >> I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... >> >> On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Could you please review the fix for JDK-8147807 and approve push to >>> 8u-dev? >>> >>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147807 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8147807/jdk8/webrev.00/ >>> >>> The issue is not relevant to jdk 9. >>> >>> The fix just removes kcms service leaving lcms as the only option >>> which is the default in jdk8. >>> >>> >>> Thanks in advance, >>> Alexey >> > From jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 09:02:50 2016 From: jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com (Jaroslav Bachorik) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:02:50 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <1455197775.3615.25.camel@redhat.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> <1455197775.3615.25.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56C1943A.7030704@oracle.com> On 11.2.2016 14:36, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 12:38 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Jaroslav has informed me that CCC has been approved for the JDK 8u port. >> Consider this request approved for jdk8u-dev as a result. > > Thanks Sean, Jaroslav! > > Jaroslav, would you be willing to push all the fixes together through > JPRT for me? Working on it. > >> On a side note, a docs sub-task should be created in the master bug to >> ensure docs get updated for this change. > > I'm not sure what this means. Shall I create that bug or somebody else? > If me, how does this work? I can do that. But it means simply creating a subtask for that issue mentioning that it is intended for docs - is that correct, Sean? -JB- > > Thanks, > Severin > >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 02/02/2016 10:42, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >>> On 2.2.2016 11:24, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>>> Hi Sean, Jaroslav, >>>> >>>> On Fri, 2016-01-29 at 13:51 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>> Severin, >>>>> >>>>> this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new >>>>> system >>>>> property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. >>>> >>>> Thanks for the heads-up. >>>> >>>>> Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this >>>>> port ? >>>> >>>> Was there an answer that I've missed about this? >>> >>> Not yet. But, yes, I am going to file the CCC request. >>> >>> -JB- >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Severin >>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Sean. >>>>> >>>>> On 29/01/16 13:27, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please approve the following backports to 8u-dev. They are all related >>>>>> to 6425769. 8145982 and 8146015 were test fixes for JDK 9 for the test >>>>>> introduced with the JDK 9 fix for 6425769. Once approved, it would be >>>>>> best to push everything together. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6425769 >>>>>> Webrev: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8.00/ >>>>>> HG export patch: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-6425769/jdk8-exports/ >>>>>> Review-thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-November/000873.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The actual fix for 6425769 is the same as in 9, but the test needed >>>>>> changing since there are differences in the available test library (no >>>>>> ProcessThread in JDK8 for example). It works the same way as in 9, >>>>>> though. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145982 >>>>>> Webrev: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>>>>> >>>>>> HG export patch: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8145982/jdk8-exports/JDK-8145982.export.jdk.patch >>>>>> Review-thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000895.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Test fix. Same as in 9. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146015 >>>>>> Webrev: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8.00/webrev/ >>>>>> >>>>>> HG export patch: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8146015/jdk8-exports/JDK-8146015.export.jdk.patch >>>>>> Review-thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jmx-dev/2015-December/000899.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Test fix. It needed some changing since the change from JDK 9 used >>>>>> some >>>>>> JDK 9 only features, such as >>>>>> NetworkInterfaces.networkInterfaces()/NetworkInterfaces.inetAddresses() >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let me know if there are questions. I'd need a sponsor who can >>>>>> push this via JPRT. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Severin >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 09:09:35 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:09:35 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56C1943A.7030704@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> <1455197775.3615.25.camel@redhat.com> <56C1943A.7030704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C195CF.6030006@oracle.com> On 15/02/2016 09:02, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> I'm not sure what this means. Shall I create that bug or somebody else? >> If me, how does this work? > > I can do that. But it means simply creating a subtask for that issue > mentioning that it is intended for docs - is that correct, Sean? Sounds like a good approach Jaroslav. File the sub-task into the docs component. Thanks, Sean. > > -JB- From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 09:17:31 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 10:17:31 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException Message-ID: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> Hi, please approve and review the following backport to 8u. 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. Thanks, Tobias From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 09:36:21 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:36:21 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C19C15.5030205@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 15/02/2016 09:17, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 > > The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. > > Thanks, > Tobias From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 10:38:15 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:38:15 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C19C15.5030205@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> <56C19C15.5030205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C1AA97.5020500@oracle.com> Thanks, Sean. Best, Tobias On 15.02.2016 10:36, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 15/02/2016 09:17, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >> >> 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 >> >> The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Mon Feb 15 10:53:30 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:53:30 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <56C1943A.7030704@oracle.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> <1454408651.3494.2.camel@redhat.com> <56B0881F.60105@oracle.com> <56BC80E3.9070502@oracle.com> <1455197775.3615.25.camel@redhat.com> <56C1943A.7030704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1455533610.4681.6.camel@redhat.com> On Mon, 2016-02-15 at 10:02 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 11.2.2016 14:36, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 12:38 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > > Jaroslav has informed me that CCC has been approved for the JDK 8u port. > > > Consider this request approved for jdk8u-dev as a result. > > > > Thanks Sean, Jaroslav! > > > > Jaroslav, would you be willing to push all the fixes together through > > JPRT for me? > > Working on it. > > > > > > On a side note, a docs sub-task should be created in the master bug to > > > ensure docs get updated for this change. > > > > I'm not sure what this means. Shall I create that bug or somebody else? > > If me, how does this work? > > I can do that. But it means simply creating a subtask for that issue? > mentioning that it is intended for docs - is that correct, Sean? Thanks, Jaroslav! Cheers, Severin From michael.haupt at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 11:32:22 2016 From: michael.haupt at oracle.com (Michael Haupt) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:32:22 +0100 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8149744: fix testng.jar delivery in Nashorn build.xml Message-ID: <77ACAAAC-6487-4D40-B2C1-083E9E7B8364@oracle.com> Dear all, please approve the backport of the following patch to 8u. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149744 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005955.html 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8149744-8u/webrev.00/ The patch for 8u differs from the one for 9 as the affected files were different. Thanks, Michael -- Dr. Michael Haupt | Principal Member of Technical Staff Phone: +49 331 200 7277 | Fax: +49 331 200 7561 Oracle Java Platform Group | LangTools Team | Nashorn Oracle Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Schiffbauergasse 14 | 14467 Potsdam, Germany ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Hauptverwaltung: Riesstra?e 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. | Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Nederland, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 12:48:37 2016 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (Sundararajan Athijegannathan) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 18:18:37 +0530 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8149744: fix testng.jar delivery in Nashorn build.xml In-Reply-To: <77ACAAAC-6487-4D40-B2C1-083E9E7B8364@oracle.com> References: <77ACAAAC-6487-4D40-B2C1-083E9E7B8364@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C1C925.1050108@oracle.com> +1 On 2/15/2016 5:02 PM, Michael Haupt wrote: > Dear all, > > please approve the backport of the following patch to 8u. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149744 > JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005955.html > 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8149744-8u/webrev.00/ > > The patch for 8u differs from the one for 9 as the affected files were different. > > Thanks, > > Michael > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 13:04:06 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 13:04:06 +0000 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8149744: fix testng.jar delivery in Nashorn build.xml In-Reply-To: <56C1C925.1050108@oracle.com> References: <77ACAAAC-6487-4D40-B2C1-083E9E7B8364@oracle.com> <56C1C925.1050108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C1CCC6.8040401@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 15/02/16 12:48, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: > +1 > > > On 2/15/2016 5:02 PM, Michael Haupt wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> please approve the backport of the following patch to 8u. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149744 >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005955.html >> 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mhaupt/8149744-8u/webrev.00/ >> >> The patch for 8u differs from the one for 9 as the affected files >> were different. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Michael >> > From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Feb 15 17:13:05 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:13:05 -0800 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C20721.5020001@oracle.com> Looks good. Thanks, Vladimir On 2/15/16 1:17 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 > > The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. > > Thanks, > Tobias > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 06:59:01 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 07:59:01 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C20721.5020001@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> <56C20721.5020001@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C2C8B5.6020709@oracle.com> Thanks, Vladimir. Best, Tobias On 15.02.2016 18:13, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Looks good. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 2/15/16 1:17 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >> >> 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 >> >> The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias >> From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 07:45:24 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 16:45:24 +0900 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C2C8B5.6020709@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> <56C20721.5020001@oracle.com> <56C2C8B5.6020709@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C2D394.7020903@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev (assuming changeset applies cleanly to 8u-dev forest) Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/16 15:59, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Thanks, Vladimir. > > Best, > Tobias > > On 15.02.2016 18:13, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Looks good. >> >> Thanks, >> Vladimir >> >> On 2/15/16 1:17 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >>> >>> 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 >>> >>> The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tobias >>> From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 08:02:45 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 09:02:45 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException In-Reply-To: <56C2D394.7020903@oracle.com> References: <56C197AB.3050208@oracle.com> <56C20721.5020001@oracle.com> <56C2C8B5.6020709@oracle.com> <56C2D394.7020903@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C2D7A5.7000001@oracle.com> Thanks, David. Best, Tobias On 16.02.2016 08:45, david buck wrote: > approved for backport to 8u-dev (assuming changeset applies cleanly to 8u-dev forest) > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/02/16 15:59, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Thanks, Vladimir. >> >> Best, >> Tobias >> >> On 15.02.2016 18:13, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>> Looks good. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Vladimir >>> >>> On 2/15/16 1:17 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >>>> >>>> 8148752: Compiled StringBuilder code throws StringIndexOutOfBoundsException >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148752 >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021176.html >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/4130663a3de8 >>>> >>>> The fix was pushed to hs-comp last week and nightly testing showed no problems. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tobias >>>> From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 13:48:14 2016 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (mikhail cherkasov) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 16:48:14 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception Message-ID: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> Hello, this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ Thanks, Mikhail. From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 14:06:03 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:06:03 +0100 Subject: Fwd: Re: [8u] RFR: 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56BB7AFD.4090800@oracle.com> References: <56BB758D.7070109@oracle.com> <56BB7AFD.4090800@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C32CCB.6040803@oracle.com> Hi, Anyone with 8u Reviewer status who can take a look? - Andreas On 2016-02-10 19:01, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > [Adding jdk8u-dev list] > > Hi, > > I believe I need an 8u Reviewer as well, since Dmitry is only > committer for 8u? > Could someone please take a look? > > This is type cleanup for dumping a heap with long arrays. > > Hotspot webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/hotspot/ > JDK webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/jdk/ > > See below for changes compared to the JDK 9 version. > > Regards, > Andreas > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: Re: [8u] RFR: 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: > assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy > Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 20:38:21 +0300 > From: Dmitry Samersoff > To: Andreas Eriksson , > serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net > > > > Andreas, > > Looks good for me! > > -Dmitry > > On 2016-01-28 20:36, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Please review this backport of JDK-8129419 > >. > > > > Hotspot webrev: > >http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/hotspot/ > > JDK webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/jdk/ > > > > There are three changes compared to JDK 9: > > > > 1) The hprof parser is in the JDK repo instead of top repo. > > Otherwise these changes are the same. > > > > 2) On Solaris os::write has some UseVMInterruptibleIO logic that failed > > because it assumed it was called by a JavaThread. > > I changed it to skip UseVMInterruptibleIO logic if called by a > > non-JavaThread. > > > > 3) The "heap dump file created" message were using sprintf and pragmas > > because of legacy reasons. > > Code after the change is the same as JDK 9 code. > > > > Regards, > > Andreas > > > -- > Dmitry Samersoff > Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia > * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the sources. > > From vincent.x.ryan at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 14:30:02 2016 From: vincent.x.ryan at oracle.com (Vincent Ryan) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:30:02 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for Approval: 8149411: PKCS12KeyStore cannot extract AES Secret Keys Message-ID: <5D7AD8D5-81D7-4740-A8F3-EEA4D0F3BB48@oracle.com> Please approve the backport of JDK-8149411 to 8u-dev. It eliminates a superfluous dependency on SecretKeyFactory when retrieving a secret key from a PKCS12 keystore. Except for the usual source file path difference, the fix for 8u-dev is identical to that in 9-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149411 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vinnie/8149411-8u/webrev.00/ Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-February/013403.html From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 14:36:06 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 23:36:06 +0900 Subject: [8u] Request for Approval: 8149411: PKCS12KeyStore cannot extract AES Secret Keys In-Reply-To: <5D7AD8D5-81D7-4740-A8F3-EEA4D0F3BB48@oracle.com> References: <5D7AD8D5-81D7-4740-A8F3-EEA4D0F3BB48@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C333D6.3020007@oracle.com> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/16 23:30, Vincent Ryan wrote: > Please approve the backport of JDK-8149411 to 8u-dev. > It eliminates a superfluous dependency on SecretKeyFactory when retrieving a secret key from a PKCS12 keystore. > Except for the usual source file path difference, the fix for 8u-dev is identical to that in 9-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149411 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vinnie/8149411-8u/webrev.00/ > Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-February/013403.html > From chris.hegarty at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 15:28:12 2016 From: chris.hegarty at oracle.com (Chris Hegarty) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:28:12 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8047031: Add SocketPermission tests for legacy socket types and JDK-8065076: java/net/SocketPermission/SocketPermissionTest.java fails intermittently In-Reply-To: <56C333B3.8040403@oracle.com> References: <56C333B3.8040403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5BE56010-929C-4A17-B061-E2080A5E39D0@oracle.com> Hi Svetlana If the final result of these changes is to add SocketPermissionTest.java, as it is now in JDK 9, then I am happy with this being back ported. -Chris. On 16 Feb 2016, at 14:35, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the direct backport of a new regression test to 8u-dev. > > Web.rev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8047031/webrev.00/ > > Patch combines original test added by > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8047031 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/00382c7828ca > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-August/008659.html > > and recent fix of that test > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065076 > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/674710f62d05 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/038206.html > > Thank you, > Svetlana From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 14:35:31 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:35:31 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8047031: Add SocketPermission tests for legacy socket types and JDK-8065076: java/net/SocketPermission/SocketPermissionTest.java fails intermittently Message-ID: <56C333B3.8040403@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the direct backport of a new regression test to 8u-dev. Web.rev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8047031/webrev.00/ Patch combines original test added by https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8047031 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/00382c7828ca Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-August/008659.html and recent fix of that test https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065076 JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/674710f62d05 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/038206.html Thank you, Svetlana From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 15:33:15 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 00:33:15 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception In-Reply-To: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> References: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review (If jdk8-specific review takes place on another alias, please post a link to the review thread to this alias before pushing.) Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/16 22:48, mikhail cherkasov wrote: > Hello, > > this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 > The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. > > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 > review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html > jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ > > Thanks, > Mikhail. From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 15:52:17 2016 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (mikhail cherkasov) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 18:52:17 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception In-Reply-To: <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> References: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C345B1.9080601@oracle.com> Ok, thank you. On 2/16/2016 18:33, david buck wrote: > approved for backport to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review > > (If jdk8-specific review takes place on another alias, please post a > link to the review thread to this alias before pushing.) > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/02/16 22:48, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 >> The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. >> >> jdk9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 >> review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html >> jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ >> >> Thanks, >> Mikhail. From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 16:35:12 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:35:12 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8047031: Add SocketPermission tests for legacy socket types and JDK-8065076: java/net/SocketPermission/SocketPermissionTest.java fails intermittently In-Reply-To: <5BE56010-929C-4A17-B061-E2080A5E39D0@oracle.com> References: <56C333B3.8040403@oracle.com> <5BE56010-929C-4A17-B061-E2080A5E39D0@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C34FC0.5080600@oracle.com> Hi Chris, thank you for your replay! Yes, I thought that it would be better to back port the latest and more stable version of the test. Thank you, Svetlana On 16.02.2016 18:28, Chris Hegarty wrote: > Hi Svetlana > > If the final result of these changes is to add SocketPermissionTest.java, as it is now > in JDK 9, then I am happy with this being back ported. > > -Chris. > > On 16 Feb 2016, at 14:35, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Please approve the direct backport of a new regression test to 8u-dev. >> >> Web.rev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8047031/webrev.00/ >> >> Patch combines original test added by >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8047031 >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/00382c7828ca >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-August/008659.html >> >> and recent fix of that test >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065076 >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/674710f62d05 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/038206.html >> >> Thank you, >> Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 19:12:16 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:12:16 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8047031: Add SocketPermission tests for legacy socket types and JDK-8065076: java/net/SocketPermission/SocketPermissionTest.java fails intermittently In-Reply-To: <56C34FC0.5080600@oracle.com> References: <56C333B3.8040403@oracle.com> <5BE56010-929C-4A17-B061-E2080A5E39D0@oracle.com> <56C34FC0.5080600@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C37490.5000006@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 16/02/2016 16:35, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hi Chris, > > thank you for your replay! > Yes, I thought that it would be better to back port the latest and > more stable version of the test. > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > On 16.02.2016 18:28, Chris Hegarty wrote: >> Hi Svetlana >> >> If the final result of these changes is to add >> SocketPermissionTest.java, as it is now >> in JDK 9, then I am happy with this being back ported. >> >> -Chris. >> >> On 16 Feb 2016, at 14:35, Svetlana Nikandrova >> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Please approve the direct backport of a new regression test to 8u-dev. >>> >>> Web.rev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8047031/webrev.00/ >>> >>> Patch combines original test added by >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8047031 >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/00382c7828ca >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2014-August/008659.html >>> >>> and recent fix of that test >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065076 >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/674710f62d05 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/038206.html >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Svetlana > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Feb 16 19:14:59 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 19:14:59 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8081778: Use Intel x64 CPU instructions for RSA acceleration In-Reply-To: <56BE3096.8010808@oracle.com> References: <56BE29A1.1040207@oracle.com> <56BE3096.8010808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C37533.10907@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 12/02/2016 19:20, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > 8u changes looks good. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 2/12/16 10:51 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >> Hello! >> >> I'm seeking an approval to backport this performance enhancement to >> jdk8u-dev. >> The change applies *almost* cleanly. >> The only change I had to make was adding the extra argument to the >> 'new' operator, which is required in jdk8, but not jdk9. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081778 >> Jdk9 hotspot change: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/578f086f3435 >> Jdk9 jdk change: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/de309dbe42bf >> Jdk9 review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-May/018106.html >> >> The changes, comparing to jdk9 are in >> hotspot/src/share/vm/opto/library_call.cpp at lines #5956 and #5964; >> >> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8081778/00/webrev/ >> >> Patched Jdk was successfully built and tested on all supported >> platforms. >> >> Would you please approve this backport? >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Ivan >> >> >> From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Wed Feb 17 16:07:48 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 19:07:48 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8048356: SecureRandom default provider tests Message-ID: <56C49AD4.1020507@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the direct backport of the regression test to 8u-dev. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048356 Originally reviewed by Bradford Wetmore Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011109.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/5ee9639ba99f Thank you, Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 17 16:12:52 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:12:52 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8048356: SecureRandom default provider tests In-Reply-To: <56C49AD4.1020507@oracle.com> References: <56C49AD4.1020507@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C49C04.6070505@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 17/02/16 16:07, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the direct backport of the regression test to 8u-dev. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048356 > > Originally reviewed by Bradford Wetmore > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011109.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/5ee9639ba99f > > Thank you, > Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 17 16:38:15 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 16:38:15 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : 8144144: ORB destroy() leaks filedescriptors after unsuccessful connection Message-ID: <56C4A1F7.1030001@oracle.com> I'd like to backport this fix to the jdk8u-dev forest. JDK 9 fix applies cleanly post modular path shuffling. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144144 jdk9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/corba/rev/a98f572e2ceb JDK 9 review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/037945.html -- Regards, Sean. From naoto.sato at oracle.com Wed Feb 17 17:54:09 2016 From: naoto.sato at oracle.com (Naoto Sato) Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 09:54:09 -0800 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : 8144144: ORB destroy() leaks filedescriptors after unsuccessful connection In-Reply-To: <56C4A1F7.1030001@oracle.com> References: <56C4A1F7.1030001@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C4B3C1.50701@oracle.com> Approved. Naoto On 2/17/16 8:38 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I'd like to backport this fix to the jdk8u-dev forest. JDK 9 fix applies > cleanly post modular path shuffling. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144144 > jdk9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/corba/rev/a98f572e2ceb > JDK 9 review thread : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-January/037945.html > > From fairoz.matte at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 09:49:10 2016 From: fairoz.matte at oracle.com (Fairoz Matte) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 01:49:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA: JDK-8149347 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads Message-ID: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149347"JDK-8149347 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8017462 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016571.html All relevant tests have been run. Thanks, Fairoz From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 10:32:52 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:32:52 +0900 Subject: [8u] RFA: JDK-8149347 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads In-Reply-To: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> References: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> Message-ID: <1E1AAF58-291B-4A0C-81E7-DBCDB63FB954@oracle.com> I asked Fairoz to send a new approval request as this one used an incorrect bug id. (He used the JBS backport bug id as opposed to the ?root? id for the parent fix in JDK 9.) -Buck > On Feb 18, 2016, at 18:49, Fairoz Matte wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? > > HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149347"JDK-8149347 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads > > > > jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8017462 > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016571.html > > > All relevant tests have been run. > > > > Thanks, > > Fairoz From fairoz.matte at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 10:34:36 2016 From: fairoz.matte at oracle.com (Fairoz Matte) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 02:34:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u]RFA: JDK-8017462: G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads In-Reply-To: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> References: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> Message-ID: Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch. JDK-8017462 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8017462/ jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8017462 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/af95803d12f2 JDK8 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016571.html All relevant tests have been run. Thanks, Fairoz From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 10:38:56 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 19:38:56 +0900 Subject: [8u]RFA: JDK-8017462: G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads In-Reply-To: References: <4c0baffb-e9e5-46d2-b03f-3f48ff0f3dee@default> Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck > On Feb 18, 2016, at 19:34, Fairoz Matte wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch. > > JDK-8017462 G1: guarantee fails with UseDynamicNumberOfGCThreads > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8017462/ > jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8017462 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/af95803d12f2 > > JDK8 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016571.html > > > All relevant tests have been run. > > > > Thanks, > > Fairoz From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 12:40:13 2016 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (mikhail cherkasov) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 15:40:13 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception In-Reply-To: <56C345B1.9080601@oracle.com> References: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> <56C345B1.9080601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C5BBAD.6060304@oracle.com> Hi again, there's a link for the code review. Thanks, Mikhail. On 2/16/2016 18:52, mikhail cherkasov wrote: > Ok, thank you. > On 2/16/2016 18:33, david buck wrote: >> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review >> >> (If jdk8-specific review takes place on another alias, please post a >> link to the review thread to this alias before pushing.) >> >> Cheers, >> -Buck >> >> On 2016/02/16 22:48, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 >>> The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. >>> >>> jdk9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 >>> review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html >>> jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Mikhail. > From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 12:45:08 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 21:45:08 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception In-Reply-To: <56C5BBAD.6060304@oracle.com> References: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> <56C345B1.9080601@oracle.com> <56C5BBAD.6060304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <9542A7D4-235B-4411-8760-5F81A0D21DE0@oracle.com> Hi! Where? I only see the jdk9 review thread. Cheers, -Buck > On Feb 18, 2016, at 21:40, mikhail cherkasov wrote: > > Hi again, > > there's a link for the code review. > > Thanks, > Mikhail. > On 2/16/2016 18:52, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >> Ok, thank you. >> On 2/16/2016 18:33, david buck wrote: >>> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review >>> >>> (If jdk8-specific review takes place on another alias, please post a link to the review thread to this alias before pushing.) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Buck >>> >>> On 2016/02/16 22:48, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 >>>> The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. >>>> >>>> jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 >>>> review: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html >>>> jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Mikhail. >> > From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 12:47:19 2016 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (mikhail cherkasov) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 15:47:19 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8130242 DataFlavorComparator transitivity exception In-Reply-To: <9542A7D4-235B-4411-8760-5F81A0D21DE0@oracle.com> References: <56C3289E.6000605@oracle.com> <56C3413B.5050006@oracle.com> <56C345B1.9080601@oracle.com> <56C5BBAD.6060304@oracle.com> <9542A7D4-235B-4411-8760-5F81A0D21DE0@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C5BD57.4000402@oracle.com> oops, sorry, I haven't pasted link : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2016-February/010685.html On 2/18/2016 15:45, David Buck wrote: > Hi! > > Where? I only see the jdk9 review thread. > > Cheers, > -Buck > >> On Feb 18, 2016, at 21:40, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >> >> Hi again, >> >> there's a link for the code review. >> >> Thanks, >> Mikhail. >> On 2/16/2016 18:52, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >>> Ok, thank you. >>> On 2/16/2016 18:33, david buck wrote: >>>> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review >>>> >>>> (If jdk8-specific review takes place on another alias, please post a link to the review thread to this alias before pushing.) >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Buck >>>> >>>> On 2016/02/16 22:48, mikhail cherkasov wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> this is almost direct backport of JDK-8130242: >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130242 >>>>> The difference is only that code location was changed in jdk9. >>>>> >>>>> jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/74513e3d04b1 >>>>> review: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-July/009606.html >>>>> jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8130242/webrev/ >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Mikhail. From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 15:55:03 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 18:55:03 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8050281: New permission tests for JEP 140 Message-ID: <56C5E957.4080300@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the direct backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. Tests were originally reviewed by Sean Mullan. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050281 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011048.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/49dcd4903b01 Thank you, Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 16:11:17 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 16:11:17 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8050281: New permission tests for JEP 140 In-Reply-To: <56C5E957.4080300@oracle.com> References: <56C5E957.4080300@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C5ED25.8060109@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 18/02/2016 15:55, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the direct backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. > > Tests were originally reviewed by Sean Mullan. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050281 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011048.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/49dcd4903b01 > > Thank you, > Svetlana > From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Thu Feb 18 16:41:07 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:41:07 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8129419 - heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy Message-ID: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> Hi, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129419 Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-February/018862.html Reviewed-by: Dmitry Samersoff (dsamersoff) If I've understood it correctly, a review by Dmitry is enough since he reviewed the JDK 9 version, even though he is not an 8u reviewer? Regards, Andreas From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 19 14:41:54 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 14:41:54 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8129419 - heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> References: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C729B2.6050706@oracle.com> Andreas, Given that the code has changed for the backport, I'd suggest you seek a JDK 8u Reviewer to check this in addition to Dmitry. I'll check if the process can be enhanced for such scenarios. Approved for jdk8u-dev but pending review. Regards, Sean. On 18/02/16 16:41, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: > assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129419 > Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-February/018862.html > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Samersoff (dsamersoff) > > If I've understood it correctly, a review by Dmitry is enough since he > reviewed the JDK 9 version, even though he is not an 8u reviewer? > > Regards, > Andreas From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Fri Feb 19 14:59:13 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 15:59:13 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8129419 - heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56C729B2.6050706@oracle.com> References: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> <56C729B2.6050706@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C72DC1.2050304@oracle.com> OK, thanks. - Andreas On 2016-02-19 15:41, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Andreas, > > Given that the code has changed for the backport, I'd suggest you seek > a JDK 8u Reviewer to check this in addition to Dmitry. I'll check if > the process can be enhanced for such scenarios. > > Approved for jdk8u-dev but pending review. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 18/02/16 16:41, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: >> assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129419 >> Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-February/018862.html >> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Samersoff (dsamersoff) >> >> If I've understood it correctly, a review by Dmitry is enough since >> he reviewed the JDK 9 version, even though he is not an 8u reviewer? >> >> Regards, >> Andreas > From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Fri Feb 19 17:29:29 2016 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:29:29 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic Message-ID: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> Hello I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. Testing: jprt, testcase. Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 Webrev for hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ Webrev for jdk: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html Thanks -Vladimir From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Fri Feb 19 18:24:10 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 10:24:10 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and 7u. As result next changes where made: + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 + //on jdk7 and jdk8. +#ifndef SOLARIS if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { +#else + if (0) { +#endif ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some range of values. Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. Thanks, Vladimir On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > Hello > > I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. > > Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic > > The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. > > Testing: jprt, testcase. > > Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 > Webrev for hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ > Webrev for jdk: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html > > Thanks > -Vladimir > From roland.westrelin at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 13:58:32 2016 From: roland.westrelin at oracle.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 14:58:32 +0100 Subject: [8u] backport of 8149543: range check CastII nodes should not be split through Phi Message-ID: <91F11E92-E63F-4092-862A-8849DD7F1474@oracle.com> Hi, Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. 8149543 was pushed to jdk9 a week ago and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change applies cleanly to 8u. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149543 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/a63cf6a69972 Roland. From poonam.bajaj at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 14:03:51 2016 From: poonam.bajaj at oracle.com (Poonam Bajaj Parhar) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 06:03:51 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly Message-ID: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the backport of the following fix to 8u-dev: CR: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8133023/webrev.8u/ Code review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016671.html JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0b22be0db834 Thanks, Poonam From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 14:05:58 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 14:05:58 +0000 Subject: [8u] backport of 8149543: range check CastII nodes should not be split through Phi In-Reply-To: <91F11E92-E63F-4092-862A-8849DD7F1474@oracle.com> References: <91F11E92-E63F-4092-862A-8849DD7F1474@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CC6746.8020307@oracle.com> This request appears to be for a codereview along with push approval but I don't see a webrev for any changes that occurred in 8u. Does the patch apply cleanly? If so you likely don't need a codereview. If the patch doesn't apply cleanly please provide an updated webrev. Approved assuming the fix applies cleanly / you get a codereview. -Rob On 23/02/16 13:58, Roland Westrelin wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8149543 was pushed to jdk9 a week ago and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change applies cleanly to 8u. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149543 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/a63cf6a69972 > > Roland. > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 14:07:28 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 14:07:28 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly In-Reply-To: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> References: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CC67A0.2020105@oracle.com> Hi Poonam, Why does this have a noreg-self label? (possibly a typo of noreg-hard?) Also, please include a link to the bug in future requests. -Rob On 23/02/16 14:03, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the backport of the following fix to 8u-dev: > > CR: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8133023/webrev.8u/ > Code review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016671.html > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0b22be0db834 > > Thanks, > Poonam > > > > From roland.westrelin at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 17:05:27 2016 From: roland.westrelin at oracle.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 18:05:27 +0100 Subject: [8u] backport of 8149543: range check CastII nodes should not be split through Phi In-Reply-To: <56CC6746.8020307@oracle.com> References: <91F11E92-E63F-4092-862A-8849DD7F1474@oracle.com> <56CC6746.8020307@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8C7EA09A-A06D-4BD0-B10F-DEF98431D448@oracle.com> > This request appears to be for a codereview along with push approval but I don't see a webrev for any changes that occurred in 8u. Does the patch apply cleanly? If so you likely don't need a codereview. > > If the patch doesn't apply cleanly please provide an updated webrev. > > Approved assuming the fix applies cleanly / you get a code review. The patch does apply cleanly. Sorry for the confusion. Roland. > > -Rob > > On 23/02/16 13:58, Roland Westrelin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >> >> 8149543 was pushed to jdk9 a week ago and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change applies cleanly to 8u. >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149543 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/a63cf6a69972 >> >> Roland. >> From poonam.bajaj at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 18:59:38 2016 From: poonam.bajaj at oracle.com (Poonam Bajaj Parhar) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 10:59:38 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly In-Reply-To: <56CC67A0.2020105@oracle.com> References: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> <56CC67A0.2020105@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CCAC1A.3030109@oracle.com> Hello Rob, On 2/23/2016 6:07 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi Poonam, > > Why does this have a noreg-self label? (possibly a typo of noreg-hard?) Not sure what noreg-self means, it was already added for jdk9. I have added new label noreg-trivial as one can just run 'java +PrintFlagsFinal -version' and check the value of ParallelGCThreads to verify this fix. > > Also, please include a link to the bug in future requests. Sure, will do. Thanks, Poonam > > -Rob > > On 23/02/16 14:03, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please approve the backport of the following fix to 8u-dev: >> >> CR: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly >> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8133023/webrev.8u/ >> Code review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016671.html >> >> >> JDK9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0b22be0db834 >> >> Thanks, >> Poonam >> >> >> >> From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Tue Feb 23 22:16:29 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 14:16:29 -0800 Subject: [8u] backport of 8149543: range check CastII nodes should not be split through Phi In-Reply-To: <8C7EA09A-A06D-4BD0-B10F-DEF98431D448@oracle.com> References: <91F11E92-E63F-4092-862A-8849DD7F1474@oracle.com> <56CC6746.8020307@oracle.com> <8C7EA09A-A06D-4BD0-B10F-DEF98431D448@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CCDA3D.4030706@oracle.com> Here is review thread for jdk9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021222.html http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8149543/webrev.01/ Thanks, Vladimir On 2/23/16 9:05 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote: >> This request appears to be for a codereview along with push approval but I don't see a webrev for any changes that occurred in 8u. Does the patch apply cleanly? If so you likely don't need a codereview. >> >> If the patch doesn't apply cleanly please provide an updated webrev. >> >> Approved assuming the fix applies cleanly / you get a code review. > > The patch does apply cleanly. Sorry for the confusion. > > Roland. > >> >> -Rob >> >> On 23/02/16 13:58, Roland Westrelin wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >>> >>> 8149543 was pushed to jdk9 a week ago and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change applies cleanly to 8u. >>> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149543 >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/a63cf6a69972 >>> >>> Roland. >>> > From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Wed Feb 24 05:56:33 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 21:56:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8147645: get_ctrl_no_update() code is wrong Message-ID: <75839e25-3d37-414e-9ed7-7ffcc2758018@default> Hi All, Could somebody approve this clean backport into jdk8u-dev. JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147645 Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/796b8077f6e6 Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/021000.html Tested with jprt. Regards, Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 24 09:23:21 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 09:23:21 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8147645: get_ctrl_no_update() code is wrong In-Reply-To: <75839e25-3d37-414e-9ed7-7ffcc2758018@default> References: <75839e25-3d37-414e-9ed7-7ffcc2758018@default> Message-ID: <56CD7689.5070904@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 24/02/2016 05:56, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this clean backport into jdk8u-dev. > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147645 > > Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/796b8077f6e6 > > Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/021000.html > > > > Tested with jprt. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Wed Feb 24 15:56:20 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 18:56:20 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-7185591: jcmd-big-script.sh ERROR: could not find app's Java pid In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-7185591 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7185591) The changeset is the same as in JDK 9 but it does not apply clearly due to difference in a changes history between JDK 8 source files and JDK 9 source files. So webrev published: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8150316/webrev.00/ JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0ba15ac25072 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013759.html Thanks, Alexander From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 24 16:28:10 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:28:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-7185591: jcmd-big-script.sh ERROR: could not find app's Java pid In-Reply-To: <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CDDA1A.7010408@oracle.com> Hi Alexander, You will need an explicit codereview of the changes in 8 before pushing. Approved on the condition that you get a review. -Rob On 24/02/16 15:56, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-7185591 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7185591) > > The changeset is the same as in JDK 9 but it does not apply clearly due > to difference in a changes history between JDK 8 source files and JDK 9 > source files. So webrev published: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8150316/webrev.00/ > > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0ba15ac25072 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013759.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 24 16:28:23 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:28:23 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-7185591: jcmd-big-script.sh ERROR: could not find app's Java pid In-Reply-To: <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CDDA27.8050305@oracle.com> Looks fine. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 24/02/16 15:56, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-7185591 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7185591) > > The changeset is the same as in JDK 9 but it does not apply clearly > due to difference in a changes history between JDK 8 source files and > JDK 9 source files. So webrev published: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8150316/webrev.00/ > > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0ba15ac25072 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013759.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 11:31:10 2016 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (Sundararajan Athijegannathan) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:01:10 +0530 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148379: jdk.nashorn.api.scripting spec. adjustments, clarifications Message-ID: <56CEE5FE.1010007@oracle.com> Please approve the following backport: bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148379 jdk9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005973.html jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/ the patch wouldn't apply 'as is' (apart from source layout changes). I had to do manual merge in two files: build.xml: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/make/build.xml.udiff.html -- because jdk8u build.xml and jdk9-dev build.xml are different now and hence line numbers don't match http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/src/jdk/nashorn/api/scripting/AbstractJSObject.java.udiff.html -- 8u source is slightly different. I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev alias as well. -Sundar From sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 11:31:51 2016 From: sundararajan.athijegannathan at oracle.com (Sundararajan Athijegannathan) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 17:01:51 +0530 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148379: jdk.nashorn.api.scripting spec. adjustments, clarifications In-Reply-To: <56CEE5FE.1010007@oracle.com> References: <56CEE5FE.1010007@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CEE627.5070103@oracle.com> On 2/25/2016 5:01 PM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: > Please approve the following backport: > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148379 > jdk9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005973.html > jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/ > > the patch wouldn't apply 'as is' (apart from source layout changes). I > had to do manual merge in two files: > > build.xml: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/make/build.xml.udiff.html > > > -- because jdk8u build.xml and jdk9-dev build.xml are different now > and hence line numbers don't match > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/src/jdk/nashorn/api/scripting/AbstractJSObject.java.udiff.html > > > -- 8u source is slightly different. > > I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev alias as well. > > -Sundar From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 12:36:59 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:36:59 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements Message-ID: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> Hello, please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were combined with there fixes. Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ Please find detailed info below: "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f + fix for that test: "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be updated for JDK-8061210" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various TLS/SSL combinations." https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 Thank you, Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 12:44:41 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 12:44:41 +0000 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148379: jdk.nashorn.api.scripting spec. adjustments, clarifications In-Reply-To: <56CEE627.5070103@oracle.com> References: <56CEE5FE.1010007@oracle.com> <56CEE627.5070103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CEF739.7000807@oracle.com> I see you've already obtained CCC approval for JDK 8u. Approved but subject to peer code review. Regards, Sean. On 25/02/2016 11:31, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: > > > On 2/25/2016 5:01 PM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: >> Please approve the following backport: >> >> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148379 >> jdk9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005973.html >> jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/ >> >> the patch wouldn't apply 'as is' (apart from source layout changes). >> I had to do manual merge in two files: >> >> build.xml: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/make/build.xml.udiff.html >> >> >> -- because jdk8u build.xml and jdk9-dev build.xml are different now >> and hence line numbers don't match >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/src/jdk/nashorn/api/scripting/AbstractJSObject.java.udiff.html >> >> >> -- 8u source is slightly different. >> >> I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev alias as well. >> >> -Sundar > From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 12:48:08 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 13:48:08 +0100 Subject: [8u] approval request for 8148379: jdk.nashorn.api.scripting spec. adjustments, clarifications In-Reply-To: <56CEE627.5070103@oracle.com> References: <56CEE5FE.1010007@oracle.com> <56CEE627.5070103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CEF808.3050100@oracle.com> The backport looks good to me. Hannes Am 2016-02-25 um 12:31 schrieb Sundararajan Athijegannathan: > > > On 2/25/2016 5:01 PM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan wrote: >> Please approve the following backport: >> >> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148379 >> jdk9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-February/005973.html >> jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/ >> >> the patch wouldn't apply 'as is' (apart from source layout changes). >> I had to do manual merge in two files: >> >> build.xml: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/make/build.xml.udiff.html >> >> >> -- because jdk8u build.xml and jdk9-dev build.xml are different now >> and hence line numbers don't match >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8148379/8u/webrev.00/src/jdk/nashorn/api/scripting/AbstractJSObject.java.udiff.html >> >> >> -- 8u source is slightly different. >> >> I'm cc'ing nashorn-dev alias as well. >> >> -Sundar > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 12:49:22 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 12:49:22 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. Regards, Sean. On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were > combined with there fixes. > Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. > > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ > > > Please find detailed info below: > > "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 > > "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f > + fix for that test: > "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be > updated for JDK-8061210" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b > > "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a > > "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 > > "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various > TLS/SSL combinations." > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a > + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 > + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 > + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 > > "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e > > "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 > > Thank you, > Svetlana From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 12:58:05 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:58:05 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-7185591: jcmd-big-script.sh ERROR: could not find app's Java pid In-Reply-To: <56CDDA1A.7010408@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56CDD2A4.3000303@oracle.com> <56CDDA1A.7010408@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CEFA5D.5080502@oracle.com> Thanks. Se?n Coffey reviewed and approved this change - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-February/005072.html On 24.02.2016 19:28, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi Alexander, > > You will need an explicit codereview of the changes in 8 before pushing. > > Approved on the condition that you get a review. > > -Rob > > On 24/02/16 15:56, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-7185591 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7185591) >> >> The changeset is the same as in JDK 9 but it does not apply clearly due >> to difference in a changes history between JDK 8 source files and JDK 9 >> source files. So webrev published: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8150316/webrev.00/ >> >> >> JDK 9 Changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0ba15ac25072 >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013759.html >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> Alexander >> >> >> From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 16:19:07 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:19:07 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8149915: enabling validate-annotations feature for xsd schema with annotation causes NPE Message-ID: <56CF297B.4080104@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve backport of NPE fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. The fix is almost a straight-forward backport (after path reshuffling): This fix caused JCK test failure in JDK9 [2], one-liner fix for the failure also included into this backport. Regression test for the issue was moved from 'jaxp' to 'jdk/test' folder with minor modification: jtreg header was added. Testing shows no JTREG/JCK xml tests failures. JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/95c223e6eaf0 JDK9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038881.html JDK8 webrev with backported changes: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8149915/8/00/ Thanks, Aleksej [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149915 [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150470 From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 19:01:28 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:01:28 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150470: JCK: api/xsl/conf/copy/copy19 test failure Message-ID: <56CF4F88.5090204@oracle.com> Hi, Can I have separate approval to backport fix for JCK test failure [1] to JDK8u-dev. Fix applies cleanly after unshuffling. It is a follow-up approval for JDK-8149915 requested earlier. JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/264df5d957cd JDK9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039056.html Thanks, Aleksej [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150470 From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Feb 25 19:04:26 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:04:26 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8149915: enabling validate-annotations feature for xsd schema with annotation causes NPE In-Reply-To: <56CF297B.4080104@oracle.com> References: <56CF297B.4080104@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56CF503A.8050805@oracle.com> Hi, It was decided to request separate approval for JDK-8150470. This backport will be a straight-forward one except the location of regression test. Best Regards, Aleksej On 02/25/2016 07:19 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Please, approve backport of NPE fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. > The fix is almost a straight-forward backport (after path reshuffling): > This fix caused JCK test failure in JDK9 [2], one-liner fix for the > failure also included into this backport. > Regression test for the issue was moved from 'jaxp' to 'jdk/test' > folder with minor modification: jtreg header was added. > Testing shows no JTREG/JCK xml tests failures. > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/95c223e6eaf0 > > JDK9 Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038881.html > > > JDK8 webrev with backported changes: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8149915/8/00/ > > Thanks, > Aleksej > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149915 > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150470 From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 14:06:56 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:06:56 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8054278: Refactor jps utility tests In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D05C00.2000001@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8054278 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054278) The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly except lines offset in ProblemList.txt. So I guess there is no need for webrev. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6407a15e2274 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-August/015319.html Thanks, Alexander From david.buck at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 14:14:18 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 23:14:18 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8054278: Refactor jps utility tests In-Reply-To: <56D05C00.2000001@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56D05C00.2000001@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D05DBA.9050607@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Please be sure to add the appropriate noreg label to the bug report before pushing. (noreg-self seem appropriate here.) [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Cheers, -Buck On 2016/02/26 23:06, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8054278 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054278) > > The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly except lines offset in > ProblemList.txt. So I guess there is no need for webrev. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6407a15e2274 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-August/015319.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 15:00:46 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:00:46 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8149915: enabling validate-annotations feature for xsd schema with annotation causes NPE In-Reply-To: <56CF503A.8050805@oracle.com> References: <56CF297B.4080104@oracle.com> <56CF503A.8050805@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160226150046.GA3164@vimes> Approved -Rob On 25/02/16 10:04, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > It was decided to request separate approval for JDK-8150470. This backport > will be a straight-forward one except the location of regression test. > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > On 02/25/2016 07:19 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Please, approve backport of NPE fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. > >The fix is almost a straight-forward backport (after path reshuffling): > >This fix caused JCK test failure in JDK9 [2], one-liner fix for the > >failure also included into this backport. > >Regression test for the issue was moved from 'jaxp' to 'jdk/test' folder > >with minor modification: jtreg header was added. > >Testing shows no JTREG/JCK xml tests failures. > > > >JDK9 changeset: > >http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/95c223e6eaf0 > > > >JDK9 Review thread: > >http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/038881.html > > > > > >JDK8 webrev with backported changes: > >http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8149915/8/00/ > > > >Thanks, > >Aleksej > > > >[1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149915 > >[2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150470 > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 15:01:32 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:01:32 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150470: JCK: api/xsl/conf/copy/copy19 test failure In-Reply-To: <56CF4F88.5090204@oracle.com> References: <56CF4F88.5090204@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160226150132.GB3164@vimes> Approved -Rob On 25/02/16 10:01, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Can I have separate approval to backport fix for JCK test failure [1] to > JDK8u-dev. > Fix applies cleanly after unshuffling. It is a follow-up approval for > JDK-8149915 requested earlier. > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/264df5d957cd > > JDK9 Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039056.html > > Thanks, > Aleksej > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150470 From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 15:31:09 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 15:31:09 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, > Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to JDK-8130150 Regards, Sean. On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue > with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and > 7u. As result next changes where made: > > + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 > + //on jdk7 and jdk8. > +#ifndef SOLARIS > if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { > +#else > + if (0) { > +#endif > ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); > > Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some > range of values. > Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >> Hello >> >> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >> >> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >> >> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >> >> Testing: jprt, testcase. >> >> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >> Webrev for >> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >> Webrev for jdk: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >> >> Thanks >> -Vladimir >> From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Fri Feb 26 16:04:56 2016 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 19:04:56 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> Hello Sean I have filled such bug yet because I haven't pushed the changeset yet, so the "bug" isn't present at the moment in any of java repos. Vladimir. On 26.02.2016 18:31, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, > >> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. > > can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to > JDK-8130150 > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue >> with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and >> 7u. As result next changes where made: >> >> + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 >> + //on jdk7 and jdk8. >> +#ifndef SOLARIS >> if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { >> +#else >> + if (0) { >> +#endif >> ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); >> >> Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some >> range of values. >> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >> >> Thanks, >> Vladimir >> >> On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>> Hello >>> >>> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >>> >>> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >>> >>> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >>> >>> Testing: jprt, testcase. >>> >>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >>> Webrev for >>> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >>> Webrev for jdk: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vladimir >>> > From martinrb at google.com Sun Feb 28 01:10:10 2016 From: martinrb at google.com (Martin Buchholz) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2016 17:10:10 -0800 Subject: Request for approval: 8150780 Repeated offer and remove on ConcurrentLinkedQueue lead to an OutOfMemoryError Message-ID: I rarely do jdk8 backports, but excessive interest on concurrency-interest guilted me into doing this one. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150780 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk8/backport-JDK-8054446/ From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 09:14:00 2016 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 12:14:00 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8062536 Message-ID: <56D40BD8.2080501@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport fix for JDK-8062536 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062536 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4e15f194ea88 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-November/015883.html Thanks, Konstantin From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 10:15:04 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 19:15:04 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8062536 In-Reply-To: <56D40BD8.2080501@oracle.com> References: <56D40BD8.2080501@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8FD2B5AD-F2A4-46C5-925C-A067AE9283E3@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Please be sure to add the appropriate noreg label to the JBS bug report before pushing. [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Cheers, -Buck > On Feb 29, 2016, at 18:14, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > > Hi All, > > I would like to backport fix for JDK-8062536 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062536 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4e15f194ea88 > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-November/015883.html > > Thanks, > Konstantin From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 11:35:40 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 20:35:40 +0900 Subject: Request for approval: 8054446 Repeated offer and remove on ConcurrentLinkedQueue lead to an OutOfMemoryError In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Paul / Chris! Because you are both reviewers for 8u-dev, would one of you please code review this backport? Hi Martin! Thank you for backporting this important fix. For future reference, here is the template for 8u-dev push approval: [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html If all of these changes were reviewed and pushed into JDK 9 as a single entity, then a new code review will be required to backport a subset of the changes. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/6dd59c01f011 Also please note that we never use the backport bug ID. We always refer to issues by the ?root? bug ID (the bug ID for the fix that was pushed into the mainline development project), even for backport discussions. I have corrected the mail thread subject line and here is the correct JBS link to use: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054446 This backport is approved for push to 8u-dev pending successful code review by a 8u-dev reviewer. Cheers, -Buck > On Feb 28, 2016, at 10:10, Martin Buchholz wrote: > > I rarely do jdk8 backports, but excessive interest on > concurrency-interest guilted me into doing this one. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150780 > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk8/backport-JDK-8054446/ From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 15:05:53 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 18:05:53 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> Sean, thank you! Xue-Lei, if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ Thank you, Svetlana On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Hello, >> >> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >> combined with there fixes. >> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >> >> Webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >> >> >> Please find detailed info below: >> >> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >> >> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >> + fix for that test: >> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >> updated for JDK-8061210" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >> >> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >> >> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >> >> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >> TLS/SSL combinations." >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >> >> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >> >> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >> >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >> >> Thank you, >> Svetlana > From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 19:37:39 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 11:37:39 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D49E03.8070407@oracle.com> I filed: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150878 Vladimir On 2/26/16 8:04 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > Hello Sean > > I have filled such bug yet because I haven't pushed the changeset yet, > so the "bug" isn't present at the moment in any of java repos. > > Vladimir. > > On 26.02.2016 18:31, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, >> >>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >> >> can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to >> JDK-8130150 >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue >>> with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and >>> 7u. As result next changes where made: >>> >>> + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 >>> + //on jdk7 and jdk8. >>> +#ifndef SOLARIS >>> if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { >>> +#else >>> + if (0) { >>> +#endif >>> ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); >>> >>> Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some >>> range of values. >>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Vladimir >>> >>> On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>>> Hello >>>> >>>> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >>>> >>>> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >>>> >>>> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >>>> >>>> Testing: jprt, testcase. >>>> >>>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >>>> Webrev for >>>> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >>>> Webrev for jdk: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -Vladimir >>>> >> > From roland.westrelin at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 20:52:57 2016 From: roland.westrelin at oracle.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 21:52:57 +0100 Subject: [8u] backport of 8148353: [linux-sparc] Crash in libawt.so on Linux SPARC Message-ID: <826FAB32-8FC1-4FDA-AE0E-0F3D083D8AFA@oracle.com> Hi, Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. 8148353 was pushed to jdk9 last week (on Wednesday) and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change doesn?t apply cleanly to 8u: I had to rework the test because the infrastructure to run native jtreg tests doesn?t seem to exist in 8. I restricted the test to linux-sparc to keep it simple. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148353 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/1f4f4866aee0 New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8148353/webrev.8u.00/ review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/thread.html#21530 Note that when I pushed 8148353 to 9, the fix version was set to 8 and so a backport was created for 9. Roland. From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Feb 29 23:35:24 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 15:35:24 -0800 Subject: [8u] backport of 8148353: [linux-sparc] Crash in libawt.so on Linux SPARC In-Reply-To: <826FAB32-8FC1-4FDA-AE0E-0F3D083D8AFA@oracle.com> References: <826FAB32-8FC1-4FDA-AE0E-0F3D083D8AFA@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D4D5BC.30503@oracle.com> Looks good. Note, the code fix was applied cleanly to jdk 8u. Only test have to be modified. Thanks, Vladimir On 2/29/16 12:52 PM, Roland Westrelin wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8148353 was pushed to jdk9 last week (on Wednesday) and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change doesn?t apply cleanly to 8u: I had to rework the test because the infrastructure to run native jtreg tests doesn?t seem to exist in 8. I restricted the test to linux-sparc to keep it simple. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148353 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/1f4f4866aee0 > > New webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8148353/webrev.8u.00/ > > review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/thread.html#21530 > > Note that when I pushed 8148353 to 9, the fix version was set to 8 and so a backport was created for 9. > > Roland. >