From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 08:15:28 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 09:15:28 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 Message-ID: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> Hi, please approve and review the following backports to 8u. 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. Thanks, Tobias From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 08:35:51 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:35:51 +0900 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> Hi Tobias! Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html Cheers, -Buck On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > please approve and review the following backports to 8u. > > 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 > > 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 > > Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. > > Thanks, > Tobias > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 09:30:33 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 10:30:33 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> Hi David, sure, I included the links to the code review: 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020503.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020502.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 Thanks, Tobias On 04.01.2016 09:35, david buck wrote: > Hi Tobias! > > Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? > > [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please approve and review the following backports to 8u. >> >> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >> >> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >> >> Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias >> From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 09:56:39 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 18:56:39 +0900 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A41D7.2030503@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Thank you for adding the review links. Cheers, -Buck On 2016/01/04 18:30, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi David, > > sure, I included the links to the code review: > > 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020503.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 > > 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020502.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 > > Thanks, > Tobias > > On 04.01.2016 09:35, david buck wrote: >> Hi Tobias! >> >> Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? >> >> [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html >> >> Cheers, >> -Buck >> >> On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> please approve and review the following backports to 8u. >>> >>> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >>> >>> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >>> >>> Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tobias >>> From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 10:04:06 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:04:06 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A41D7.2030503@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> <568A41D7.2030503@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A4396.7070301@oracle.com> Thanks, David! I will push this to 8u-dev as soon as I get a peer review for the backport. Best, Tobias On 04.01.2016 10:56, david buck wrote: > approved for backport to 8u-dev > > Thank you for adding the review links. > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/01/04 18:30, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> sure, I included the links to the code review: >> >> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020503.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >> >> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020502.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias >> >> On 04.01.2016 09:35, david buck wrote: >>> Hi Tobias! >>> >>> Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? >>> >>> [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] >>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Buck >>> >>> On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> please approve and review the following backports to 8u. >>>> >>>> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >>>> >>>> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >>>> >>>> Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tobias >>>> From sbaiduzh at redhat.com Mon Jan 4 10:19:13 2016 From: sbaiduzh at redhat.com (Stanislav Baiduzhyi) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:19:13 +0100 Subject: Downloading Source code In-Reply-To: <5683AD54.4090207@redhat.com> References: <9B8327B3-7D09-400D-B55E-51FF611F3517@oracle.com> <5683AD54.4090207@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568A4721.3080704@redhat.com> On 30/12/15 11:09, Andrew Haley wrote: > On 30/12/15 09:46, Wang Weijun wrote: >> I suppose when you said download manager friendly it means you can easily resume a broken download. > > You can't do better than hg for that purpose. It automatically > resumes a broken download. This will result in 5 times the network traffic. For a person who is not interested in historical data it will be the least optimal solution. Unfortunately openjdk.java.net does not offer a source bundle download any more. I would suggest one of the following: http://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/development/rawhide/source/SRPMS/j/java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.65-15.b17.fc24.src.rpm http://icedtea.wildebeest.org/download/drops/icedtea7/2.7.0/ Both of them support the resume of the download with 'wget -c' or graphical download managers, and both of them will result in much smaller download size. Of course RPM then needs 3 layers of unpacking, while drops of icedtea 7 will require some manual work to put the tree together to make it buildable. -- Regards, Stas From cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 12:32:57 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (cheleswer sahu) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 18:02:57 +0530 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval: 8138745: Implement ExitOnOutOfMemory and CrashOnOutOfMemory in HotSpot Message-ID: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> Hi! May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8, and tested already. As some of the API's are not available or have some different signature in JDK8, I have done some code changes to make the change-set appropriate for JDK8. As I do not have account for OPENJDK, Kevin walls will push this fix into JDK8 repository. BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8138745 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/cbc2d5fbdae1 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-December/018356.html Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8138745_8u_01/ Regards, Cheleswer From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 14:04:11 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:04:11 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval: 8138745: Implement ExitOnOutOfMemory and CrashOnOutOfMemory in HotSpot In-Reply-To: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> References: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A7BDB.60800@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 04/01/16 12:32, cheleswer sahu wrote: > Hi! > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I > have built the JDK8, and tested already. As some of the API's are not > available or have some different signature in JDK8, I have done some > code changes to make the change-set appropriate for JDK8. As I do not > have account for OPENJDK, Kevin walls will push this fix into JDK8 > repository. > > BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8138745 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/cbc2d5fbdae1 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-December/018356.html > > Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8138745_8u_01/ > > > Regards, > Cheleswer From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 15:48:08 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 07:48:08 -0800 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568A9438.3010400@oracle.com> Looks good. Thanks, Vladimir On 1/4/16 1:30 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi David, > > sure, I included the links to the code review: > > 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020503.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 > > 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020502.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 > > Thanks, > Tobias > > On 04.01.2016 09:35, david buck wrote: >> Hi Tobias! >> >> Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? >> >> [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html >> >> Cheers, >> -Buck >> >> On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> please approve and review the following backports to 8u. >>> >>> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >>> >>> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >>> >>> Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tobias >>> From omajid at redhat.com Mon Jan 4 16:47:26 2016 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:47:26 -0500 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux Message-ID: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> Hi, Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different (module-based) paths. The original review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? Thanks, Omair -- PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 16:52:58 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 16:52:58 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. -Rob On 04/01/16 16:47, Omair Majid wrote: > Hi, > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 > > The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different > (module-based) paths. > > The original review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html > > Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? > > Thanks, > Omair > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 4 17:12:49 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 17:12:49 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> Hi Sergey, Is this change something that would require a CCC? -Rob On 04/01/16 16:52, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. > > -Rob > > On 04/01/16 16:47, Omair Majid wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 >> Webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ >> >> JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 >> >> The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different >> (module-based) paths. >> >> The original review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html >> >> Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? >> >> Thanks, >> Omair >> From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Jan 5 06:03:14 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 07:03:14 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8144487 and 8145754 In-Reply-To: <568A9438.3010400@oracle.com> References: <568A2A20.7030601@oracle.com> <568A2EE7.4030600@oracle.com> <568A3BB9.1010501@oracle.com> <568A9438.3010400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568B5CA2.4090003@oracle.com> Thanks, Vladimir. Best, Tobias On 04.01.2016 16:48, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Looks good. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 1/4/16 1:30 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi David, >> >> sure, I included the links to the code review: >> >> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020503.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >> >> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-December/020502.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias >> >> On 04.01.2016 09:35, david buck wrote: >>> Hi Tobias! >>> >>> Would you please include links to the code review threads on mail.openjdk.java.net? >>> >>> [ JDK 8 Updates: Push Approval Request Template ] >>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Buck >>> >>> On 2016/01/04 17:15, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> please approve and review the following backports to 8u. >>>> >>>> 8144487: PhaseIdealLoop::build_and_optimize() must restore major_progress flag if skip_loop_opts is true >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144487 >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/21689239c407 >>>> >>>> 8145754: PhaseIdealLoop::is_scaled_iv_plus_offset() does not match AddI >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145754 >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/0e9d64117522 >>>> >>>> Nightly testing showed no problems and the changes apply cleanly to 8u-dev. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tobias >>>> From Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com Tue Jan 5 14:39:17 2016 From: Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com (Roger Riggs) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 09:39:17 -0500 Subject: RFR(S): 8144937 [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <567BC35C.7010304@oracle.com> References: <5677F419.3030400@oracle.com> <567A6C87.2060201@oracle.com> <567AE8C1.7040304@Oracle.com> <567BC35C.7010304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568BD595.4010307@Oracle.com> A jdk8u Reviewer is needed for this. Roger On 12/24/2015 5:05 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > Hi Roger, > > Thank you for notice this. > I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ > > The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in > implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file > for JDK9 and JDK8u. > > 23.12.15 21:32, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Hi Sergei, >> >> The diff seems to be against a jdk9 repo in contrast to the comment >> that says it is targeted at 8u. >> >> But otherwise looks ok. >> >> Roger >> >> On 12/23/2015 4:42 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>> Could somebody take a look? >>> >>> 21.12.15 15:44, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>>> Hello All, >>>> >>>> Please review a fix for >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> Problem: several fixes should be excluded from execution on compact >>>> profiles. Also some library classes required "sun.tools.jar.Main" >>>> class that not exists in JRE. >>>> >>>> The CR targeted for 8u76. For JDK9 required separate fix based on >>>> modules that not applicable for JDK8u. >>>> Fix verified by jtreg test list generation. >>>> >>> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 5 15:36:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 15:36:39 +0000 Subject: RFR(S): 8144937 [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <568BD595.4010307@Oracle.com> References: <5677F419.3030400@oracle.com> <567A6C87.2060201@oracle.com> <567AE8C1.7040304@Oracle.com> <567BC35C.7010304@oracle.com> <568BD595.4010307@Oracle.com> Message-ID: <568BE307.9070106@oracle.com> Looks ok to me also. Please remember to file an approval request[1] before pushing to the jdk8u-dev forest. The bug report will need the 9-na label. It should also be linked to the JDK 9 bug record. [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html Regards, Sean. On 05/01/2016 14:39, Roger Riggs wrote: > A jdk8u Reviewer is needed for this. > > Roger > > > > On 12/24/2015 5:05 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >> Hi Roger, >> >> Thank you for notice this. >> I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ >> >> The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in >> implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file >> for JDK9 and JDK8u. >> >> 23.12.15 21:32, Roger Riggs wrote: >>> Hi Sergei, >>> >>> The diff seems to be against a jdk9 repo in contrast to the comment >>> that says it is targeted at 8u. >>> >>> But otherwise looks ok. >>> >>> Roger >>> >>> On 12/23/2015 4:42 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>>> Could somebody take a look? >>>> >>>> 21.12.15 15:44, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>>>> Hello All, >>>>> >>>>> Please review a fix for >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 >>>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.00/ >>>>> >>>>> Problem: several fixes should be excluded from execution on >>>>> compact profiles. Also some library classes required >>>>> "sun.tools.jar.Main" class that not exists in JRE. >>>>> >>>>> The CR targeted for 8u76. For JDK9 required separate fix based on >>>>> modules that not applicable for JDK8u. >>>>> Fix verified by jtreg test list generation. >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > From cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Tue Jan 5 15:39:11 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (cheleswer sahu) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 21:09:11 +0530 Subject: [8u] RFR: 8138745: Implement ExitOnOutOfMemory and CrashOnOutOfMemory in HotSpot In-Reply-To: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> References: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568BE39F.60304@oracle.com> Hi! Please review the code changes for "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8138745". I have built the JDK8 and tested already. As some of the API's are not available or have some different signature in JDK8, I have done some code changes to make the JDK9 change-set appropriate for JDK8. JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/cbc2d5fbdae1 Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8138745_8u_01/ Regards, Cheleswer From omajid at redhat.com Tue Jan 5 17:36:25 2016 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 12:36:25 -0500 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160105173625.GC23507@redhat.com> Hi, * Rob McKenna [2016-01-04 12:12]: > Is this change something that would require a CCC? Should I avoid pushing this patch until any CCC-related concerns are resolved? Thanks, Omair -- PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 5 18:12:38 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:12:38 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <20160105173625.GC23507@redhat.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> <20160105173625.GC23507@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568C0796.6020800@oracle.com> Wouldn't be any harm to wait on an answer from Sergey if you don't mind Omair, thanks. -Rob On 05/01/16 17:36, Omair Majid wrote: > Hi, > > * Rob McKenna [2016-01-04 12:12]: >> Is this change something that would require a CCC? > > Should I avoid pushing this patch until any CCC-related concerns are > resolved? > > Thanks, > Omair > From david.holmes at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 03:47:04 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 13:47:04 +1000 Subject: [8u] RFR: 8138745: Implement ExitOnOutOfMemory and CrashOnOutOfMemory in HotSpot In-Reply-To: <568BE39F.60304@oracle.com> References: <568A6679.1080605@oracle.com> <568BE39F.60304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568C8E38.9050303@oracle.com> Seems okay. Thanks, David On 6/01/2016 1:39 AM, cheleswer sahu wrote: > Hi! > > Please review the code changes for > "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8138745". I have built the > JDK8 and tested already. > As some of the API's are not available or have some different signature > in JDK8, I have done some code changes to make the JDK9 change-set > appropriate for JDK8. > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/cbc2d5fbdae1 > Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8138745_8u_01/ > > Regards, > Cheleswer > > > > > From david.holmes at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 05:04:22 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:04:22 +1000 Subject: RFR(S): 8144937 [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <567BC35C.7010304@oracle.com> References: <5677F419.3030400@oracle.com> <567A6C87.2060201@oracle.com> <567AE8C1.7040304@Oracle.com> <567BC35C.7010304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568CA056.5070402@oracle.com> On 24/12/2015 8:05 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > Hi Roger, > > Thank you for notice this. > I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ > > The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in > implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file for > JDK9 and JDK8u. Looks fine to me too. Thanks, David > 23.12.15 21:32, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Hi Sergei, >> >> The diff seems to be against a jdk9 repo in contrast to the comment >> that says it is targeted at 8u. >> >> But otherwise looks ok. >> >> Roger >> >> On 12/23/2015 4:42 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>> Could somebody take a look? >>> >>> 21.12.15 15:44, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>>> Hello All, >>>> >>>> Please review a fix for >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> Problem: several fixes should be excluded from execution on compact >>>> profiles. Also some library classes required "sun.tools.jar.Main" >>>> class that not exists in JRE. >>>> >>>> The CR targeted for 8u76. For JDK9 required separate fix based on >>>> modules that not applicable for JDK8u. >>>> Fix verified by jtreg test list generation. >>>> >>> >> > From candrews at integralblue.com Wed Jan 6 14:56:09 2016 From: candrews at integralblue.com (Craig Andrews) Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 09:56:09 -0500 Subject: Questions about JDK-8136353 "ClassValue preventing class unloading" Message-ID: I apologize for contacting this list - I'm sure this isn't the "right way" to contact the OpenJDK project, but I'm not clear what the "right way" is. I'm hoping to raise https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136353 "ClassValue preventing class unloading" as I believe it's a significant issue in ClassValue which is a blocker for its use in dynamic languages (which is primiarly why ClassValue was introduced). I think the P5 priority set on the bug now is way too low, perhaps you could consider raising the priority? The source code in the issue description is incorrect; it doesn't compile. Could you please attach the working test cases to the issue, so future testers and developers can reproduce the problem? Here are links to the 2 source code files: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12765900/CVTest.java https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12765901/MyClassValue.java (which of course should be directly attached to the openjdk issue tracker issue, and not hyperlinked to the Groovy tracker) And to reproduce the issue, run: $ javac MyClassValue.java && javac CVTest.java && mkdir -p t && jar cvf t/t.jar MyClassValue*.class && rm MyClassValue*.class && JAVA_OPTS=-Xmx4m java CVTest and wait for the an error to occur, which is: Exception in thread "main" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Compressed class space at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method) at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:759) at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:152) at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(URLClassLoader.java:470) at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(URLClassLoader.java:76) at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:371) at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:365) at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:364) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:423) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:356) at CVTest.main(CVTest.java:12) The bug is reproducible on all JDK 8 and 9 builds (I tested up to JDK 9 build 99). Based on my understanding of the situation from my research in the Groovy bug that discovered the issue ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-6704 ) and some work another person did with the YourKit profiler ( https://www.yourkit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12658 ), I suspect that the fix for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8032606 "ClassValue.ClassValueMap.type is unused" is relevant; I think the problem lies in the java.lang.Class.classValueMap implementation. Thank you, ~Craig Andrews From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 15:17:41 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:17:41 +0000 Subject: Questions about JDK-8136353 "ClassValue preventing class unloading" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <568D3015.90002@oracle.com> I would imagine compiler-dev at openjdk.java.net would be the best alias to contact. A list of email aliases can be found at: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo (though I appreciate that that list is a little overwhelming!) I'll forward your mail there. -Rob On 06/01/16 14:56, Craig Andrews wrote: > I apologize for contacting this list - I'm sure this isn't the "right > way" to contact the OpenJDK project, but I'm not clear what the "right > way" is. > > I'm hoping to raise https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136353 > "ClassValue preventing class unloading" as I believe it's a significant > issue in ClassValue which is a blocker for its use in dynamic languages > (which is primiarly why ClassValue was introduced). I think the P5 > priority set on the bug now is way too low, perhaps you could consider > raising the priority? > > The source code in the issue description is incorrect; it doesn't > compile. Could you please attach the working test cases to the issue, so > future testers and developers can reproduce the problem? Here are links > to the 2 source code files: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12765900/CVTest.java > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12765901/MyClassValue.java > (which of course should be directly attached to the openjdk issue > tracker issue, and not hyperlinked to the Groovy tracker) > > And to reproduce the issue, run: > $ javac MyClassValue.java && javac CVTest.java && mkdir -p t && jar cvf > t/t.jar MyClassValue*.class && rm MyClassValue*.class && > JAVA_OPTS=-Xmx4m java CVTest > and wait for the an error to occur, which is: > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Compressed class > space > at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method) > at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:759) > at > java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:152) > at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(URLClassLoader.java:470) > at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(URLClassLoader.java:76) > at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:371) > at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(URLClassLoader.java:365) > at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method) > at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:364) > at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:423) > at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:356) > at CVTest.main(CVTest.java:12) > > The bug is reproducible on all JDK 8 and 9 builds (I tested up to JDK 9 > build 99). > > Based on my understanding of the situation from my research in the > Groovy bug that discovered the issue ( > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-6704 ) and some work > another person did with the YourKit profiler ( > https://www.yourkit.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12658 ), I suspect > that the fix for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8032606 > "ClassValue.ClassValueMap.type is unused" is relevant; I think the > problem lies in the java.lang.Class.classValueMap implementation. > > Thank you, > ~Craig Andrews From Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com Wed Jan 6 15:29:25 2016 From: Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com (Roger Riggs) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:29:25 -0500 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8144937 - [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution Message-ID: <568D32D5.6080701@Oracle.com> Please approve a change to tests for compact1 and compact2 authored by Sergei Kovalev, On 24/12/2015 8:05 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > > I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ > > The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in > implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file for > JDK9 and JDK8u. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 15:36:17 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:36:17 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8144937 - [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <568D32D5.6080701@Oracle.com> References: <568D32D5.6080701@Oracle.com> Message-ID: <568D3471.20206@oracle.com> Does this bug need a 9-na keyword? Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004727.html Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ Please follow the approval request template for future requests: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html -Rob On 06/01/16 15:29, Roger Riggs wrote: > Please approve a change to tests for compact1 and compact2 authored by > Sergei Kovalev, > > On 24/12/2015 8:05 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >> >> I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ >> >> The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in >> implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file for >> JDK9 and JDK8u. > > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 15:36:56 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 15:36:56 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8144937 - [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <568D3471.20206@oracle.com> References: <568D32D5.6080701@Oracle.com> <568D3471.20206@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568D3498.60407@oracle.com> Forgot the most important bit: Approved. -Rob On 06/01/16 15:36, Rob McKenna wrote: > Does this bug need a 9-na keyword? > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004727.html > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ > > Please follow the approval request template for future requests: > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html > > -Rob > > On 06/01/16 15:29, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Please approve a change to tests for compact1 and compact2 authored by >> Sergei Kovalev, >> >> On 24/12/2015 8:05 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>> >>> I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ >>> >>> The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in >>> implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file for >>> JDK9 and JDK8u. >> >> From Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com Wed Jan 6 15:40:39 2016 From: Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com (Roger Riggs) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 10:40:39 -0500 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8144937 - [TEST_BUG] testlibrary_tests should be excluded for compact1 and compact2 execution In-Reply-To: <568D3471.20206@oracle.com> References: <568D32D5.6080701@Oracle.com> <568D3471.20206@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568D3577.6050407@Oracle.com> Thanks Rob, I'm sorry to not have followed the template correctly. 9-na keyword added. Roger On 1/6/2016 10:36 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Does this bug need a 9-na keyword? > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144937 > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-January/004727.html > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ > > Please follow the approval request template for future requests: > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html > > -Rob > > On 06/01/16 15:29, Roger Riggs wrote: >> Please approve a change to tests for compact1 and compact2 authored by >> Sergei Kovalev, >> >> On 24/12/2015 8:05 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>> >>> I've created new patch based on jdk8u-dev. >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8144937/webrev.01/ >>> >>> The fix is similar in approach but has little difference in >>> implementation due to differences in the content of TEST.groups file >>> for >>> JDK9 and JDK8u. >> >> From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Wed Jan 6 17:54:32 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 12:54:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: Downloading Source code In-Reply-To: <568A4721.3080704@redhat.com> References: <9B8327B3-7D09-400D-B55E-51FF611F3517@oracle.com> <5683AD54.4090207@redhat.com> <568A4721.3080704@redhat.com> Message-ID: <178778051.4861683.1452102872895.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On 30/12/15 11:09, Andrew Haley wrote: > > On 30/12/15 09:46, Wang Weijun wrote: > >> I suppose when you said download manager friendly it means you can easily > >> resume a broken download. > > > > You can't do better than hg for that purpose. It automatically > > resumes a broken download. > > This will result in 5 times the network traffic. For a person who is not > interested in historical data it will be the least optimal solution. > Unfortunately openjdk.java.net does not offer a source bundle download > any more. > It does. $ wget -v -O root.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O hotspot.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O langtools.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/langtools/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O jdk.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O corba.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/corba/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O jaxp.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxp/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ wget -v -O jaxws.tar.bz2 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/archive/tip.tar.bz2 $ tar xjf root.tar.bz2 $ mv jdk9-* openjdk $ tar -C openjdk -xjf hotspot.tar.bz2 $ tar -C openjdk -xjf langtools.tar.bz2 $ tar -C openjdk -xjf jdk.tar.bz2 $ tar -C openjdk -xjf corba.tar.bz2 $ tar -C openjdk -xjf jaxp.tar.bz2 $ tar -C openjdk -xjf jaxws.tar.bz2 $ mv openjdk/hotspot-* openjdk/hotspot $ mv openjdk/langtools-* openjdk/langtools $ mv openjdk/jdk-* openjdk/jdk $ mv openjdk/corba-* openjdk/corba $ mv openjdk/jaxp-* openjdk/jaxp $ mv openjdk/jaxws-* openjdk/jaxws That's pretty much how IcedTea did it for years before switching to pre-built drops, which allow better compression and off-line testing. If you don't want OpenJDK 9, change the hg.openjdk.java.net path to the appropriate one (e.g. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u). It's a bit convoluted but could easily be put in a script. You can also use tags e.g. $ wget -v http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/archive/jdk8u76-b02.tar.bz2 to get jdk8u76-b02 instead of 'tip'. wget accepts -c if your download is interrupted. Thanks, -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Wed Jan 6 19:10:09 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 14:10:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR8146566: OpenJDK build can't handle commas in LDFLAGS In-Reply-To: <503792532.4897575.1452106806213.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146566 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/8u/8146566/webrev.01/ If additional LDFLAGS containing commas are passed to the build e.g. --with-extra-ldflags="-Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--sort-common" (which are the default flags on Fedora), then the build will fail as the call to SetupNativeCompilation expands LDFLAGS_JDKLIB early and the commas are interpreted to denote separate arguments to this macro. On current 8u, this only affects the demo code (BUILD_DEMO_JVMTI_$1). It did affect both the demo code and the main JDK build on 9, and I was planning to submit a similar fix there. However, 8142907 was added which fixed both cases there, as well as introducing a number of other changes. For 8u, I'd like to backport the relevant part of 8142907 under this bug, 8146566. Without this fix, the build fails with the above option. With it, it successfully completes. 8142907 in full contains other changes, many specific to Mac OS, which would introduce unnecessary changes into the 8u build. Ok to push this? -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 6 19:12:23 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 19:12:23 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for review & approval for CR8146566: OpenJDK build can't handle commas in LDFLAGS In-Reply-To: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> cc'ing build-dev for a review and updating the subject. -Rob On 06/01/16 19:10, Andrew Hughes wrote: > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146566 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/8u/8146566/webrev.01/ > > If additional LDFLAGS containing commas are passed to the build e.g. > > --with-extra-ldflags="-Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu -Wl,--sort-common" > > (which are the default flags on Fedora), then the build will fail as the call to > SetupNativeCompilation expands LDFLAGS_JDKLIB early and the commas are interpreted > to denote separate arguments to this macro. > > On current 8u, this only affects the demo code (BUILD_DEMO_JVMTI_$1). It did > affect both the demo code and the main JDK build on 9, and I was planning > to submit a similar fix there. However, 8142907 was added which fixed both cases > there, as well as introducing a number of other changes. > > For 8u, I'd like to backport the relevant part of 8142907 under this bug, 8146566. > Without this fix, the build fails with the above option. With it, > it successfully completes. 8142907 in full contains other changes, many specific > to Mac OS, which would introduce unnecessary changes into the 8u build. > > Ok to push this? > From srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com Thu Jan 7 04:00:17 2016 From: srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com (Srikanth) Date: Thu, 07 Jan 2016 09:30:17 +0530 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval to backport JDK-8145466: javac: No line numbers in compilation error In-Reply-To: <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> Hello ! Please approve the 8u76 backport of the fix made for JDK-8145466. JDK9 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145466 8u76 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146533 JDK9 change set: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/bdbad16dd9ac Unfortunately, this change set does not mechanically apply as is after path shuffling. However, manual application does not call for any new changes. All relevant tests are green. 8u76 specific code review is complete and is green: - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sadayapalam/JDK-8146533/webrev.00/ - http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2016-January/009894.html Thanks in advance, Srikanth From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 7 08:06:04 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 08:06:04 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval to backport JDK-8145466: javac: No line numbers in compilation error In-Reply-To: <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568E1C6C.1070700@oracle.com> Approved. I can take care of pushing this one to jdk8u-dev forest for you. Regards, Sean. On 07/01/2016 04:00, Srikanth wrote: > > Hello ! > > Please approve the 8u76 backport of the fix made for JDK-8145466. > > JDK9 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145466 > 8u76 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146533 > > JDK9 change set: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/bdbad16dd9ac > > Unfortunately, this change set does not mechanically apply as is > after path shuffling. However, manual application does not call > for any new changes. > > All relevant tests are green. > > 8u76 specific code review is complete and is green: > - http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sadayapalam/JDK-8146533/webrev.00/ > - > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2016-January/009894.html > > Thanks in advance, > Srikanth From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 7 09:17:49 2016 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:17:49 +0100 Subject: [8u76] Request for review & approval for CR8146566: OpenJDK build can't handle commas in LDFLAGS In-Reply-To: <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568E2D3D.2010009@oracle.com> Looks good. /Erik On 2016-01-06 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: > cc'ing build-dev for a review and updating the subject. > > -Rob > > On 06/01/16 19:10, Andrew Hughes wrote: >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146566 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/8u/8146566/webrev.01/ >> >> If additional LDFLAGS containing commas are passed to the build e.g. >> >> --with-extra-ldflags="-Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu >> -Wl,--sort-common" >> >> (which are the default flags on Fedora), then the build will fail as >> the call to >> SetupNativeCompilation expands LDFLAGS_JDKLIB early and the commas >> are interpreted >> to denote separate arguments to this macro. >> >> On current 8u, this only affects the demo code (BUILD_DEMO_JVMTI_$1). >> It did >> affect both the demo code and the main JDK build on 9, and I was >> planning >> to submit a similar fix there. However, 8142907 was added which fixed >> both cases >> there, as well as introducing a number of other changes. >> >> For 8u, I'd like to backport the relevant part of 8142907 under this >> bug, 8146566. >> Without this fix, the build fails with the above option. With it, >> it successfully completes. 8142907 in full contains other changes, >> many specific >> to Mac OS, which would introduce unnecessary changes into the 8u build. >> >> Ok to push this? >> From sbaiduzh at redhat.com Thu Jan 7 09:52:11 2016 From: sbaiduzh at redhat.com (Stanislav Baiduzhyi) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 10:52:11 +0100 Subject: Downloading Source code In-Reply-To: <178778051.4861683.1452102872895.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <9B8327B3-7D09-400D-B55E-51FF611F3517@oracle.com> <5683AD54.4090207@redhat.com> <568A4721.3080704@redhat.com> <178778051.4861683.1452102872895.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568E354B.2060300@redhat.com> On 06/01/16 18:54, Andrew Hughes wrote: > wget accepts -c if your download is interrupted. The links above are not resumable with -c, they do not specify Content-Length. -- Regards, Stas From daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Jan 7 14:53:52 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 07:53:52 -0700 Subject: CFV: New JDK8u Committer: Aleksey Shipilev In-Reply-To: <56744372.9000609@oracle.com> References: <56744372.9000609@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568E7C00.8080800@oracle.com> Vote: yes Dan On 12/18/15 10:33 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote: > I hereby nominate Aleksey Shipilev to jdk8u Committer. > > Aleksey's contributions to OpenJDK include jcstress, jol, JMH, > @Contended, sun.misc.Unsafe memory fences. > > In total Aleksey has contributed at least 16 changes to jdk8u-dev/jdk > [1] and jdk8u-dev/hotspot [2]. > > Votes are due by January, 1, 2016. > > Only current JDK8u Committers [3] are eligible to vote on this > nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing > list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [4]. > > Best regards, > Vladimir Ivanov > > [1] > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/log?rev=author%28shade%29 > [2] > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/log?rev=author%28shade%29 > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [4] http://openjdk.java.net/projects#committer-vote > From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Fri Jan 8 05:24:27 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 21:24:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized Message-ID: Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2015-November/015397.html All relevant tests have been run. Regards, Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 8 08:11:23 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:11:23 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <568F6F2B.80201@oracle.com> Approved with the condition that the JDK 9 fix applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev forest. If code was modified, please obtain a peer code review before pushing. Regards, Sean. On 08/01/2016 05:24, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? > > > > JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 > > backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 > > original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da > > public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2015-November/015397.html > > > > All relevant tests have been run. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi > > From cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Fri Jan 8 12:54:58 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (cheleswer sahu) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 18:24:58 +0530 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval: 8144483: One long Safepoint pause directly after each GC log rotation Message-ID: <568FB1A2.6030104@oracle.com> Hi, May I please have approval to push this fix in JDK8u-dev repository. This bug has only affected JDK8u not JDK9. This is a original fix in JDK8u not a backport. As I don't have OPENJDK account "Kevin walls" will push the fix for me. BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144483 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-January/017466.html Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kevinw/8144483/webrev.00/ Regards, Cheleswer From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 8 13:04:47 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:04:47 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval: 8144483: One long Safepoint pause directly after each GC log rotation In-Reply-To: <568FB1A2.6030104@oracle.com> References: <568FB1A2.6030104@oracle.com> Message-ID: <568FB3EF.4080207@oracle.com> A testcase may have been possible for this issue ? In any case, please add a suitable noreg- label for now. Approved. Regards, Sean. On 08/01/16 12:54, cheleswer sahu wrote: > Hi, > > May I please have approval to push this fix in JDK8u-dev repository. > This bug has only affected JDK8u not JDK9. This is a original fix in > JDK8u not a backport. As I don't have OPENJDK account "Kevin walls" > will push the fix for me. > > BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144483 > Review Thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-January/017466.html > Webrev Link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kevinw/8144483/webrev.00/ > > > Regards, > Cheleswer From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Jan 8 13:56:23 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:56:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u76] Request for review & approval for CR8146566: OpenJDK build can't handle commas in LDFLAGS In-Reply-To: <568E2D3D.2010009@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> <568E2D3D.2010009@oracle.com> Message-ID: <775074092.5862345.1452261383501.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Looks good. > > /Erik > Thanks Erik. Pushed: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/92c6a16b6dac > On 2016-01-06 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: > > cc'ing build-dev for a review and updating the subject. > > > > -Rob > > > > On 06/01/16 19:10, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146566 > >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/8u/8146566/webrev.01/ > >> > >> If additional LDFLAGS containing commas are passed to the build e.g. > >> > >> --with-extra-ldflags="-Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu > >> -Wl,--sort-common" > >> > >> (which are the default flags on Fedora), then the build will fail as > >> the call to > >> SetupNativeCompilation expands LDFLAGS_JDKLIB early and the commas > >> are interpreted > >> to denote separate arguments to this macro. > >> > >> On current 8u, this only affects the demo code (BUILD_DEMO_JVMTI_$1). > >> It did > >> affect both the demo code and the main JDK build on 9, and I was > >> planning > >> to submit a similar fix there. However, 8142907 was added which fixed > >> both cases > >> there, as well as introducing a number of other changes. > >> > >> For 8u, I'd like to backport the relevant part of 8142907 under this > >> bug, 8146566. > >> Without this fix, the build fails with the above option. With it, > >> it successfully completes. 8142907 in full contains other changes, > >> many specific > >> to Mac OS, which would introduce unnecessary changes into the 8u build. > >> > >> Ok to push this? > >> > > -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Jan 8 13:58:58 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 08:58:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: Downloading Source code In-Reply-To: <568E354B.2060300@redhat.com> References: <9B8327B3-7D09-400D-B55E-51FF611F3517@oracle.com> <5683AD54.4090207@redhat.com> <568A4721.3080704@redhat.com> <178778051.4861683.1452102872895.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568E354B.2060300@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1954548041.5864065.1452261538809.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On 06/01/16 18:54, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > wget accepts -c if your download is interrupted. > > The links above are not resumable with -c, they do not specify > Content-Length. > > -- > Regards, > Stas > Ah yes, true, because it's dynamically generated by Mercurial. This is the most flexible option though. -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Jan 8 15:29:30 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:29:30 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for review & approval for CR8146566: OpenJDK build can't handle commas in LDFLAGS In-Reply-To: <775074092.5862345.1452261383501.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> <568E2D3D.2010009@oracle.com> <775074092.5862345.1452261383501.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <568FD5DA.8000403@oracle.com> Approved. (not sure why I didn't explicitly state that in the last mail) -Rob On 08/01/16 13:56, Andrew Hughes wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> Looks good. >> >> /Erik >> > > Thanks Erik. Pushed: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/92c6a16b6dac > >> On 2016-01-06 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: >>> cc'ing build-dev for a review and updating the subject. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On 06/01/16 19:10, Andrew Hughes wrote: >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146566 >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/8u/8146566/webrev.01/ >>>> >>>> If additional LDFLAGS containing commas are passed to the build e.g. >>>> >>>> --with-extra-ldflags="-Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-O1 -Wl,--hash-style=gnu >>>> -Wl,--sort-common" >>>> >>>> (which are the default flags on Fedora), then the build will fail as >>>> the call to >>>> SetupNativeCompilation expands LDFLAGS_JDKLIB early and the commas >>>> are interpreted >>>> to denote separate arguments to this macro. >>>> >>>> On current 8u, this only affects the demo code (BUILD_DEMO_JVMTI_$1). >>>> It did >>>> affect both the demo code and the main JDK build on 9, and I was >>>> planning >>>> to submit a similar fix there. However, 8142907 was added which fixed >>>> both cases >>>> there, as well as introducing a number of other changes. >>>> >>>> For 8u, I'd like to backport the relevant part of 8142907 under this >>>> bug, 8146566. >>>> Without this fix, the build fails with the above option. With it, >>>> it successfully completes. 8142907 in full contains other changes, >>>> many specific >>>> to Mac OS, which would introduce unnecessary changes into the 8u build. >>>> >>>> Ok to push this? >>>> >> >> > From bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com Sat Jan 9 08:50:11 2016 From: bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com (Bahram Yarahmadi) Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 00:50:11 -0800 Subject: Building & Debuging Source Codes By netbeans Message-ID: Hello again guys, Actually I have succeeded to build the source, You helped me a lot Now I want to build the source by netbeans IDE,I made a Project (C++ project with existing source code) and my netbeans is full version (both c++ and Java ) but it couses a few Errors Would you mind guiding me ? Thanks, From bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com Sun Jan 10 01:42:13 2016 From: bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com (Bahram Yarahmadi) Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:42:13 -0800 Subject: Building & Debuging Source Codes By netbeans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Would you mind helping me how can build the source codes via netbeans ? On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Bahram Yarahmadi < bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello again guys, > Actually I have succeeded to build the source, > You helped me a lot > Now I want to build the source by netbeans IDE,I made a Project (C++ > project with existing source code) and my netbeans is full version (both > c++ and Java ) but it couses a few Errors > > Would you mind guiding me ? > > Thanks, > From vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com Mon Jan 11 11:55:01 2016 From: vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com (Vladimir Ivanov) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 14:55:01 +0300 Subject: Result: New jdk8u Committer: Aleksey Shipilev Message-ID: <56939815.6090001@oracle.com> Voting for Aleksey Shipilev [1] is now closed. Yes: 27 Veto: 0 Abstain: 0 According to the Bylaws definition of Lazy Consensus, this is sufficient to approve the nomination. Best regards, Vladimir Ivanov [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2015-December/004658.html From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Mon Jan 11 13:51:13 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 14:51:13 +0100 Subject: Building & Debuging Source Codes By netbeans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5693B351.1060604@oracle.com> I assume you're looking for something like https://dzone.com/articles/hack-openjdk-netbeans-ide cheers, dalibor topic On 10.01.2016 02:42, Bahram Yarahmadi wrote: > Would you mind helping me how can build the source codes via netbeans ? > > > On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 12:50 AM, Bahram Yarahmadi < > bahram.yarahmadi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello again guys, >> Actually I have succeeded to build the source, >> You helped me a lot >> Now I want to build the source by netbeans IDE,I made a Project (C++ >> project with existing source code) and my netbeans is full version (both >> c++ and Java ) but it couses a few Errors >> >> Would you mind guiding me ? >> >> Thanks, >> -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 06:18:05 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 09:18:05 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8074935: jdk8 keytool doesn't validate pem files for RFC 1421 correctness, as jdk7 did Message-ID: <56949A9D.5030002@oracle.com> Hello! I'd like to backport this fix to jdk8u. In particular, it will help us eliminate the regression JDK-8146592 observed in jdk8, but not in jdk7. The fix applies cleanly after unshuffling. In addition to that, I had to adjust the path to the keystore file in the regression test. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074935 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/cae3b7b19462 Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-March/011912.html Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8074935/00/webrev/ Would you please approve the backport? Sincerely yours, Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 08:58:37 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 08:58:37 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8074935: jdk8 keytool doesn't validate pem files for RFC 1421 correctness, as jdk7 did In-Reply-To: <56949A9D.5030002@oracle.com> References: <56949A9D.5030002@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5694C03D.8010307@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 12/01/2016 06:18, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > I'd like to backport this fix to jdk8u. > In particular, it will help us eliminate the regression JDK-8146592 > observed in jdk8, but not in jdk7. > > The fix applies cleanly after unshuffling. > In addition to that, I had to adjust the path to the keystore file in > the regression test. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074935 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/cae3b7b19462 > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-March/011912.html > Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8074935/00/webrev/ > > Would you please approve the backport? > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 12:15:55 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:15:55 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : JDK-8136442 : Don't tie Certificate signature algorithms to ciphersuites Message-ID: <5694EE7B.8080109@oracle.com> I'd like to backport this fix to jdk8u-dev. The fix applies cleanly post modular path unshuffling. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136442 jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/5916f63e4d08 review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013095.html -- Regards, Sean. From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 12:39:54 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 21:39:54 +0900 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : JDK-8136442 : Don't tie Certificate signature algorithms to ciphersuites In-Reply-To: <5694EE7B.8080109@oracle.com> References: <5694EE7B.8080109@oracle.com> Message-ID: <7CBADFF4-18F5-4987-A07D-F192360E8411@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck > On Jan 12, 2016, at 21:15, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > I'd like to backport this fix to jdk8u-dev. The fix applies cleanly post modular path unshuffling. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8136442 > jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/5916f63e4d08 > review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013095.html > > -- > Regards, > Sean. > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 14:07:48 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:07:48 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146725: Issues with SignatureAndHashAlgorithm.getSupportedAlgorithms Message-ID: <569508B4.4000601@oracle.com> Hello! Would you please approve this fix to be backported to jdk8u-dev? The unshuffled diff applies cleanly. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146725 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/daaace32c979 Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013300.html Sincerely yours, Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 14:21:01 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:21:01 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146725: Issues with SignatureAndHashAlgorithm.getSupportedAlgorithms In-Reply-To: <569508B4.4000601@oracle.com> References: <569508B4.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56950BCD.3070107@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 12/01/2016 14:07, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > Would you please approve this fix to be backported to jdk8u-dev? > The unshuffled diff applies cleanly. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146725 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/daaace32c979 > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013300.html > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan From Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 14:23:07 2016 From: Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com (Sergey Bylokhov) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:23:07 +0300 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> On 04/01/16 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi Sergey, > > Is this change something that would require a CCC? I am not sure that ccc is required here, because now the linux implementation works in the same way like windows before. > > -Rob > > On 04/01/16 16:52, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 04/01/16 16:47, Omair Majid wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ >>> >>> >>> JDK9 Changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 >>> >>> The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different >>> (module-based) paths. >>> >>> The original review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html >>> >>> >>> Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Omair >>> -- Best regards, Sergey. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 14:46:44 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 14:46:44 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569511D4.6030708@oracle.com> It looks like a behavioural change to me and most likely a candidate for CCC review. I'm cc'ing Joe here who may have comments on it. Joe - should this fix get a CCC review before being pushed ? Regards, Sean. On 12/01/2016 14:23, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: > On 04/01/16 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Hi Sergey, >> >> Is this change something that would require a CCC? > > I am not sure that ccc is required here, because now the linux > implementation works in the same way like windows before. > >> >> -Rob >> >> On 04/01/16 16:52, Rob McKenna wrote: >>> Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On 04/01/16 16:47, Omair Majid wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> JDK9 Changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 >>>> >>>> The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different >>>> (module-based) paths. >>>> >>>> The original review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Omair >>>> > > From alexey.menkov at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 15:33:00 2016 From: alexey.menkov at oracle.com (Alex Menkov) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 18:33:00 +0300 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <569511D4.6030708@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> <569511D4.6030708@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56951CAC.40903@oracle.com> I don't think this requires CCC - Synthesizer with default sounbank generated sounds before and will generate after the fix. The sounds will be different (better quality), but there is no behavior change. regards Alex On 12.01.2016 17:46, Se?n Coffey wrote: > It looks like a behavioural change to me and most likely a candidate for > CCC review. > > I'm cc'ing Joe here who may have comments on it. Joe - should this fix > get a CCC review before being pushed ? > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 12/01/2016 14:23, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: >> On 04/01/16 20:12, Rob McKenna wrote: >>> Hi Sergey, >>> >>> Is this change something that would require a CCC? >> >> I am not sure that ccc is required here, because now the linux >> implementation works in the same way like windows before. >> >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On 04/01/16 16:52, Rob McKenna wrote: >>>> Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. >>>> >>>> -Rob >>>> >>>> On 04/01/16 16:47, Omair Majid wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8140620 >>>>> Webrev: >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/linux-default-sf2-jdk8u/webrev/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> JDK9 Changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e006ea10d21 >>>>> >>>>> The webrev is the same as the OpenJDK 9 changeset except for different >>>>> (module-based) paths. >>>>> >>>>> The original review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/sound-dev/2015-October/000352.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Okay to push to jdk8u-dev? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Omair >>>>> >> >> > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 12 17:36:12 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 17:36:12 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] Approaching JDK 8 Updates milestone : 8u76 RDP2 Message-ID: <5695398C.1070208@oracle.com> As per the preliminary 8u76 timeline [1], the 8u76 Rampdown 2 milestone is approaching. Please aim to have all 8u76 planned fixes addressed by the third week in January. The 8u76 RDP2 build is planned for the week of Jan 28th and fixes need to be in jdk8u-dev 1 week before that for PIT testing. Once we enter RDP2, we'll fork the JDK8u master forest to create a JDK 8u76 stabilization forest. Only showstopper bugs should be considered for fixing in 8u76 after that milestone. I would also like to bring attention to the Oracle early access binaries, and invite other distributors who build binaries based on the OpenJDK JDK 8 Updates Project to do the same in this thread: https://jdk8.java.net/download.html -Rob [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u76.html From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 10:10:24 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 02:10:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> Hi, Please, can I get review for that backport? Thank you! Regards, Shafi From: Shafi Ahmad Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 10:54 AM To: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Cc: Shafi Ahmad Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2015-November/015397.html All relevant tests have been run. Regards, Shafi From volker.simonis at gmail.com Wed Jan 13 11:40:45 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 12:40:45 +0100 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before Message-ID: Hi, I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev which fixes a build problem on ppc64. Can I push this myself directly to http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. In jdk9 it contains the following lines: - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) ARCH/ppc64 = ppc ARCH/ppc = ppc - ARCH/arm = arm ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) ARCH/ppc64 = ppc - ARCH/ppc = ppc - ARCH/arm = arm ARCH/zero = zero Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work again on ppc64. Regards, Volker From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 11:57:16 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 20:57:16 +0900 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56963B9C.2040605@oracle.com> Approved with the condition that peer code review is approved before pushing. If the review is done on a different OpenJDK alias, please send a link for that review thread to this thread before pushing. Cheers, -Buck On 2016/01/13 20:40, Volker Simonis wrote: > Hi, > > I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev > which fixes a build problem on ppc64. > > Can I push this myself directly to > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 > > Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of > legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes > the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the > hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture > this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. > > In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly > handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, > because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed > ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. > > In jdk9 it contains the following lines: > > - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc > ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) > + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 > aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) > > ARCH/ppc64 = ppc > ARCH/ppc = ppc > - ARCH/arm = arm > ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 > > but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: > > - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc > ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) > + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 > zero,$(ARCH))) > > ARCH/ppc64 = ppc > - ARCH/ppc = ppc > - ARCH/arm = arm > ARCH/zero = zero > > Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line > 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. > > We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work > again on ppc64. > > Regards, > Volker > From erik.joelsson at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 12:09:21 2016 From: erik.joelsson at oracle.com (Erik Joelsson) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 13:09:21 +0100 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: <56963B9C.2040605@oracle.com> References: <56963B9C.2040605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56963E71.4000508@oracle.com> Looks good to me. /Erik On 2016-01-13 12:57, david buck wrote: > Approved with the condition that peer code review is approved before > pushing. If the review is done on a different OpenJDK alias, please > send a link for that review thread to this thread before pushing. > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/01/13 20:40, Volker Simonis wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev >> which fixes a build problem on ppc64. >> >> Can I push this myself directly to >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 >> >> Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of >> legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes >> the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the >> hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture >> this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. >> >> In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly >> handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, >> because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed >> ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. >> >> In jdk9 it contains the following lines: >> >> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >> ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 >> aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> >> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >> ARCH/ppc = ppc >> - ARCH/arm = arm >> ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 >> >> but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: >> >> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >> ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 >> zero,$(ARCH))) >> >> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >> - ARCH/ppc = ppc >> - ARCH/arm = arm >> ARCH/zero = zero >> >> Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line >> 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. >> >> We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work >> again on ppc64. >> >> Regards, >> Volker >> From david.holmes at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 12:35:49 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 22:35:49 +1000 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <569644A5.1030308@oracle.com> Hi Volker, On 13/01/2016 9:40 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: > Hi, > > I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev > which fixes a build problem on ppc64. > > Can I push this myself directly to > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? It is preferable that a shared file change goes through JPRT, just to avoid accidents. > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 > > Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of > legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes > the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the > hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture > this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. > > In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly > handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, > because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed > ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. That backport was in February 2015 and seems to have been quite correct until now. I think it is the backport of 8046471 that has caused the problem - likely because there is a big difference in jdk9 and jdk8u with regards to our closed ports. That said the fix you propose may be fine but I need to verify a few things first - which I will do when I am in the office in the morning. Thanks, David > In jdk9 it contains the following lines: > > - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc > ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) > + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 > aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) > > ARCH/ppc64 = ppc > ARCH/ppc = ppc > - ARCH/arm = arm > ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 > > but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: > > - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc > ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) > + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 > zero,$(ARCH))) > > ARCH/ppc64 = ppc > - ARCH/ppc = ppc > - ARCH/arm = arm > ARCH/zero = zero > > Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line > 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. > > We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work > again on ppc64. > > Regards, > Volker > From volker.simonis at gmail.com Wed Jan 13 13:56:55 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:56:55 +0100 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: <569644A5.1030308@oracle.com> References: <569644A5.1030308@oracle.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:35 PM, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Volker, > > On 13/01/2016 9:40 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev >> which fixes a build problem on ppc64. >> >> Can I push this myself directly to >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? > > > It is preferable that a shared file change goes through JPRT, just to avoid > accidents. > Sure, if you volunteer as a sponsor :) >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 >> >> Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of >> legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes >> the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the >> hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture >> this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. >> >> In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly >> handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, >> because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed >> ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. > > > That backport was in February 2015 and seems to have been quite correct > until now. I think it is the backport of 8046471 that has caused the problem That's exactly what I wanted to express with the bug summary "Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before" :) The real problem is that the backport (i.e. 8073816) was not a "real" backport but was done in parallel (and actually submitted even before) 8072383. I've reviewed both changes at that time (see mail thread [1]) and detected exactly this problem (see [2]) in the initial jdk9 version (because jdk9 already contained 8046471 at that time). Dean included the fix I proposed in his change for jdk9 so no problem. But now somebody has decided to also downport 8046471 to jdk8u so we're facing the same problems there. And they can be solved by the same fix. [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/thread.html#17121 [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/017148.html > - likely because there is a big difference in jdk9 and jdk8u with regards to > our closed ports. > > That said the fix you propose may be fine but I need to verify a few things > first - which I will do when I am in the office in the morning. So will you push this trough JPRT? Would be great! Thanks, Volker > > Thanks, > David > > >> In jdk9 it contains the following lines: >> >> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >> ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 >> aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> >> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >> ARCH/ppc = ppc >> - ARCH/arm = arm >> ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 >> >> but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: >> >> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >> ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) >> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 >> zero,$(ARCH))) >> >> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >> - ARCH/ppc = ppc >> - ARCH/arm = arm >> ARCH/zero = zero >> >> Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line >> 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. >> >> We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work >> again on ppc64. >> >> Regards, >> Volker >> > From volker.simonis at gmail.com Wed Jan 13 13:58:00 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:58:00 +0100 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: <56963E71.4000508@oracle.com> References: <56963B9C.2040605@oracle.com> <56963E71.4000508@oracle.com> Message-ID: Thanks David and Erik! On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Looks good to me. > > /Erik > > > On 2016-01-13 12:57, david buck wrote: >> >> Approved with the condition that peer code review is approved before >> pushing. If the review is done on a different OpenJDK alias, please send a >> link for that review thread to this thread before pushing. >> >> Cheers, >> -Buck >> >> On 2016/01/13 20:40, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev >>> which fixes a build problem on ppc64. >>> >>> Can I push this myself directly to >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 >>> >>> Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of >>> legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes >>> the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the >>> hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture >>> this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. >>> >>> In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly >>> handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, >>> because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed >>> ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. >>> >>> In jdk9 it contains the following lines: >>> >>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>> ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 >>> aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> >>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>> ARCH/ppc = ppc >>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>> ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 >>> >>> but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: >>> >>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>> ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 >>> zero,$(ARCH))) >>> >>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>> - ARCH/ppc = ppc >>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>> ARCH/zero = zero >>> >>> Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line >>> 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. >>> >>> We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work >>> again on ppc64. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Volker >>> > From stefan.johansson at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 14:02:18 2016 From: stefan.johansson at oracle.com (Stefan Johansson) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:02:18 +0100 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized In-Reply-To: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> References: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> Message-ID: <569658EA.4080704@oracle.com> Can you please post a webrev for the backport? So we can see what needed to change from the original patch. Thanks, Stefan On 2016-01-13 11:10, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi, > > > > Please, can I get review for that backport? Thank you! > > > > Regards, > > Shafi > > > > > > From: Shafi Ahmad > Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 10:54 AM > To: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > Cc: Shafi Ahmad > Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized > > > > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? > > > > JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 > > backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 > > original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da > > public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2015-November/015397.html > > > > All relevant tests have been run. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi > > From sergei.kovalev at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 15:17:33 2016 From: sergei.kovalev at oracle.com (Sergei Kovalev) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 18:17:33 +0300 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8061624 -- [TESTBUG] Some tests cannot be ran under compact profiles and therefore shall be excluded Message-ID: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> Hi, Could somebody approve this patch into jdk8u-dev? Issue record: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061624 Patch review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.00/ The proposed solution is not applicable for JDK9 forest because it uses module mechanism. Solution: modify TEST.group file to exclude execution of tests on compact profiles. Tests list see below: Required Full JRE: javax/xml/ws/8043129/MailTest.java -- because of MailcapCommandMap component sun/security/pkcs11/Provider/Login.sh -- because of com.sun.security.auth.callback.DialogCallbackHandler javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of javax.xml.bind.annotation.XmlType Required full JDK: javax/xml/ws/8033113/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool javax/xml/ws/ebcdic/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool sun/management/jmxremote/startstop/JMXStartStopTest.java -- because of jcmd binary tool javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of schemagen binary tool -- With best regards, Sergei From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 15:39:51 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 15:39:51 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8061624 -- [TESTBUG] Some tests cannot be ran under compact profiles and therefore shall be excluded In-Reply-To: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> References: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56966FC7.8060304@oracle.com> Looks ok to me Sergei. (Reviewed) Please add a '9-na' label to the bug report. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 13/01/16 15:17, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > Hi, > > Could somebody approve this patch into jdk8u-dev? > > Issue record: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061624 > Patch review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.00/ > > The proposed solution is not applicable for JDK9 forest because it > uses module mechanism. > > Solution: modify TEST.group file to exclude execution of tests on > compact profiles. Tests list see below: > > Required Full JRE: > javax/xml/ws/8043129/MailTest.java -- because of MailcapCommandMap > component > sun/security/pkcs11/Provider/Login.sh -- because of > com.sun.security.auth.callback.DialogCallbackHandler > javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of > javax.xml.bind.annotation.XmlType > > Required full JDK: > javax/xml/ws/8033113/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool > javax/xml/ws/ebcdic/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool > sun/management/jmxremote/startstop/JMXStartStopTest.java -- because > of jcmd binary tool > javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of schemagen > binary tool > From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 16:55:35 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:55:35 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8068162: jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp: guarantee(false) failed: OLD and/or OBSOLETE method(s) found Message-ID: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> Hi, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8068162 . The hotspot changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. The jdk changeset only removed the test from quarantine, and is not needed since the test is not quarantined in JDK 8. JDK 9 Changesets: Hotspot: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/4d3f1d99d12e JDK (for reference): http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0d0ee1a20b17 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2015-January/016793.html Regards, Andreas From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 17:00:45 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:00:45 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8068162: jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp: guarantee(false) failed: OLD and/or OBSOLETE method(s) found In-Reply-To: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> References: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569682BD.5040803@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 13/01/16 16:55, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8068162 > . > The hotspot changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > The jdk changeset only removed the test from quarantine, and is not > needed since the test is not quarantined in JDK 8. > > JDK 9 Changesets: > Hotspot: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/4d3f1d99d12e > JDK (for reference): > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0d0ee1a20b17 > > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2015-January/016793.html > > Regards, > Andreas From serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 20:10:13 2016 From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com (serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 12:10:13 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8068162: jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp: guarantee(false) failed: OLD and/or OBSOLETE method(s) found In-Reply-To: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> References: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5696AF25.60108@oracle.com> Hi Andreas, Approved. Thank you for taking care about this! Serguei On 1/13/16 08:55, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8068162 > . > The hotspot changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > The jdk changeset only removed the test from quarantine, and is not > needed since the test is not quarantined in JDK 8. > > JDK 9 Changesets: > Hotspot: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/4d3f1d99d12e > JDK (for reference): > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0d0ee1a20b17 > > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2015-January/016793.html > > Regards, > Andreas From serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com Wed Jan 13 20:23:40 2016 From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com (serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 12:23:40 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8068162: jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp: guarantee(false) failed: OLD and/or OBSOLETE method(s) found In-Reply-To: <5696AF25.60108@oracle.com> References: <56968187.40607@oracle.com> <5696AF25.60108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5696B24C.50808@oracle.com> Sorry for the confusion, guys. I thought Andreas was looking to get my review thumbs up before getting an approval from the 8u-dev release team. :) Thanks, Serguei On 1/13/16 12:10, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote: > Hi Andreas, > > Approved. > > Thank you for taking care about this! > Serguei > > On 1/13/16 08:55, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8068162 >> . >> The hotspot changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >> The jdk changeset only removed the test from quarantine, and is not >> needed since the test is not quarantined in JDK 8. >> >> JDK 9 Changesets: >> Hotspot: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/4d3f1d99d12e >> JDK (for reference): >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/0d0ee1a20b17 >> >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2015-January/016793.html >> >> >> Regards, >> Andreas > From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 03:41:25 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:41:25 +1000 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: References: <569644A5.1030308@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569718E5.7000408@oracle.com> Reviewed, sponsored and pushed. Cheers, David On 13/01/2016 11:56 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:35 PM, David Holmes wrote: >> Hi Volker, >> >> On 13/01/2016 9:40 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev >>> which fixes a build problem on ppc64. >>> >>> Can I push this myself directly to >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? >> >> >> It is preferable that a shared file change goes through JPRT, just to avoid >> accidents. >> > > Sure, if you volunteer as a sponsor :) > >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 >>> >>> Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of >>> legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes >>> the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the >>> hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture >>> this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. >>> >>> In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly >>> handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, >>> because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed >>> ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. >> >> >> That backport was in February 2015 and seems to have been quite correct >> until now. I think it is the backport of 8046471 that has caused the problem > > That's exactly what I wanted to express with the bug summary "Backport > of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly > backported before" :) > > The real problem is that the backport (i.e. 8073816) was not a "real" > backport but was done in parallel (and actually submitted even before) > 8072383. > > I've reviewed both changes at that time (see mail thread [1]) and > detected exactly this problem (see [2]) in the initial jdk9 version > (because jdk9 already contained 8046471 at that time). Dean included > the fix I proposed in his change for jdk9 so no problem. But now > somebody has decided to also downport 8046471 to jdk8u so we're facing > the same problems there. And they can be solved by the same fix. > > [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/thread.html#17121 > [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/017148.html > >> - likely because there is a big difference in jdk9 and jdk8u with regards to >> our closed ports. >> >> That said the fix you propose may be fine but I need to verify a few things >> first - which I will do when I am in the office in the morning. > > So will you push this trough JPRT? Would be great! > > Thanks, > Volker > >> >> Thanks, >> David >> >> >>> In jdk9 it contains the following lines: >>> >>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>> ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 >>> aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> >>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>> ARCH/ppc = ppc >>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>> ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 >>> >>> but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: >>> >>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>> ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 >>> zero,$(ARCH))) >>> >>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>> - ARCH/ppc = ppc >>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>> ARCH/zero = zero >>> >>> Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line >>> 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. >>> >>> We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work >>> again on ppc64. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Volker >>> >> From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 03:55:00 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:55:00 +1000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8061624 -- [TESTBUG] Some tests cannot be ran under compact profiles and therefore shall be excluded In-Reply-To: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> References: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56971C14.70500@oracle.com> Hi Sergei, On 14/01/2016 1:17 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > Hi, > > Could somebody approve this patch into jdk8u-dev? > > Issue record: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061624 > Patch review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.00/ > > The proposed solution is not applicable for JDK9 forest because it uses > module mechanism. > > Solution: modify TEST.group file to exclude execution of tests on > compact profiles. Tests list see below: > > Required Full JRE: > javax/xml/ws/8043129/MailTest.java -- because of MailcapCommandMap > component > sun/security/pkcs11/Provider/Login.sh -- because of > com.sun.security.auth.callback.DialogCallbackHandler > javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of > javax.xml.bind.annotation.XmlType I don't see a entry for the above, but I see this: javax/xml/ws/8046817 which doesn't seem to exist. > Required full JDK: > javax/xml/ws/8033113/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool > javax/xml/ws/ebcdic/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary tool > sun/management/jmxremote/startstop/JMXStartStopTest.java -- because of > jcmd binary tool > javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of schemagen > binary tool You seem to have overlooked adding back javax/xml/crypto to compact2 David ----- From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 04:30:02 2016 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 20:30:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8145722: NullPointerException in javadoc Message-ID: Hi, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8145722: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145722 This is trivial one liner fix, which just adds the null check to memberLevelMap in method VisibleMemberMap.purgeMemberLevelMap(). JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/3eceb9bbbb9a The fix was pushed to JDK9 by Jonathan Gibbons and was reviewed there by Kumar Srinivasan, no review thread is available. The backport patch is already reviewed by Jonathan Gibbons. Regards, Ramanand. From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 04:55:39 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:55:39 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8145722: NullPointerException in javadoc In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck > On Jan 14, 2016, at 13:30, Ramanand Patil wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8145722: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145722 > > > > This is trivial one liner fix, which just adds the null check to memberLevelMap in method VisibleMemberMap.purgeMemberLevelMap(). > > > > JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/3eceb9bbbb9a > > > > The fix was pushed to JDK9 by Jonathan Gibbons and was reviewed there by Kumar Srinivasan, no review thread is available. > > > > The backport patch is already reviewed by Jonathan Gibbons. > > > > > > Regards, > > Ramanand. From volker.simonis at gmail.com Thu Jan 14 07:15:32 2016 From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 08:15:32 +0100 Subject: RFR(XS): 8146979: Backport of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly backported before In-Reply-To: <569718E5.7000408@oracle.com> References: <569644A5.1030308@oracle.com> <569718E5.7000408@oracle.com> Message-ID: Great! Thanks a lot David, Volker On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 4:41 AM, David Holmes wrote: > Reviewed, sponsored and pushed. > > Cheers, > David > > > On 13/01/2016 11:56 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:35 PM, David Holmes >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Volker, >>> >>> On 13/01/2016 9:40 PM, Volker Simonis wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I please need an urgent review for this little patch in jdk8u-dev >>>> which fixes a build problem on ppc64. >>>> >>>> Can I push this myself directly to >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot ? >>> >>> >>> >>> It is preferable that a shared file change goes through JPRT, just to >>> avoid >>> accidents. >>> >> >> Sure, if you volunteer as a sponsor :) >> >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~simonis/webrevs/2016/8146979/ >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146979 >>>> >>>> Recently the change "8046471: Use OPENJDK_TARGET_CPU_ARCH instead of >>>> legacy value for hotspot ARCH" was backporeted to jdk8u. It changes >>>> the ARCH value which is passed from the top-level configure to the >>>> hotspot make via the hotspot-spec.gmk file. For the ppc64 architecture >>>> this changes the reported value for ARCH from 'ppc64' to 'ppc'. >>>> >>>> In jdk9 this is no problem, because the hotspot makefiles correctly >>>> handle this value. Unfortunately in jdk8u this is not the case, >>>> because the change "8072383: resolve conflicts between open and closed >>>> ports" hasn't been correctly downported from jdk9 to jdk8u before. >>> >>> >>> >>> That backport was in February 2015 and seems to have been quite correct >>> until now. I think it is the backport of 8046471 that has caused the >>> problem >> >> >> That's exactly what I wanted to express with the bug summary "Backport >> of 8046471 breaks ppc64 build in jdk8u because 8072383 was badly >> backported before" :) >> >> The real problem is that the backport (i.e. 8073816) was not a "real" >> backport but was done in parallel (and actually submitted even before) >> 8072383. >> >> I've reviewed both changes at that time (see mail thread [1]) and >> detected exactly this problem (see [2]) in the initial jdk9 version >> (because jdk9 already contained 8046471 at that time). Dean included >> the fix I proposed in his change for jdk9 so no problem. But now >> somebody has decided to also downport 8046471 to jdk8u so we're facing >> the same problems there. And they can be solved by the same fix. >> >> [1] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/thread.html#17121 >> [2] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/017148.html >> >>> - likely because there is a big difference in jdk9 and jdk8u with regards >>> to >>> our closed ports. >>> >>> That said the fix you propose may be fine but I need to verify a few >>> things >>> first - which I will do when I am in the office in the morning. >> >> >> So will you push this trough JPRT? Would be great! >> >> Thanks, >> Volker >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> David >>> >>> >>>> In jdk9 it contains the following lines: >>>> >>>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>>> ppc64 aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc ppc64 >>>> aarch64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>>> >>>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>>> ARCH/ppc = ppc >>>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>>> ARCH/aarch64= aarch64 >>>> >>>> but in the downport this was for whatever reason changed to: >>>> >>>> - SRCARCH = $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 arm ppc >>>> ppc64 zero,$(ARCH))) >>>> + SRCARCH ?= $(ARCH/$(filter sparc sparc64 ia64 amd64 x86_64 ppc64 >>>> zero,$(ARCH))) >>>> >>>> ARCH/ppc64 = ppc >>>> - ARCH/ppc = ppc >>>> - ARCH/arm = arm >>>> ARCH/zero = zero >>>> >>>> Notice how in jdk8u 'ppc' was removed from SRCARCH and how the line >>>> 'ARCH/ppc = ppc' was completely deleted in jdk8u. >>>> >>>> We need to fix these two line in jdk8u in order to make the build work >>>> again on ppc64. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Volker >>>> >>> > From sergei.kovalev at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 09:40:13 2016 From: sergei.kovalev at oracle.com (Sergei Kovalev) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 12:40:13 +0300 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8061624 -- [TESTBUG] Some tests cannot be ran under compact profiles and therefore shall be excluded In-Reply-To: <56971C14.70500@oracle.com> References: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> <56971C14.70500@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56976CFD.2040909@oracle.com> Hi David, Appreciate your feedback. Updated review link: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.01/ See my comments in-lined. 14.01.16 06:55, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Sergei, > > On 14/01/2016 1:17 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Could somebody approve this patch into jdk8u-dev? >> >> Issue record: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061624 >> Patch review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.00/ >> >> The proposed solution is not applicable for JDK9 forest because it uses >> module mechanism. >> >> Solution: modify TEST.group file to exclude execution of tests on >> compact profiles. Tests list see below: >> >> Required Full JRE: >> javax/xml/ws/8043129/MailTest.java -- because of MailcapCommandMap >> component >> sun/security/pkcs11/Provider/Login.sh -- because of >> com.sun.security.auth.callback.DialogCallbackHandler >> javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of >> javax.xml.bind.annotation.XmlType > > I don't see a entry for the above, but I see this: > > javax/xml/ws/8046817 > > which doesn't seem to exist. That's really my error. I've removed wrong line. javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java covered by "javax/xml/bind/jxc" (line 352). There are several test cases under the folder and I'd like to combine them in single line because all of them have similar requirements. > >> Required full JDK: >> javax/xml/ws/8033113/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary >> tool >> javax/xml/ws/ebcdic/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary >> tool >> sun/management/jmxremote/startstop/JMXStartStopTest.java -- because of >> jcmd binary tool >> javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of schemagen >> binary tool > > You seem to have overlooked adding back javax/xml/crypto to compact2 The item already listed in the section "needs_compact3" (see line 489). > > David > ----- > -- With best regards, Sergei From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 16:00:26 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:00:26 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson Message-ID: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html [4] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html | From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 16:11:52 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:11:52 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html [4] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan > Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer > in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project > makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK > 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, > 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]. > Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html | > From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 16:13:20 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 17:13:20 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5697C920.9090108@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanK On 2016-01-14 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 > Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in > the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 17:47:12 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 18:47:12 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5697DF20.1020703@oracle.com> Hi Stefan, I think that nominations also need to include Committer references, per http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-refs [0] - can you reply to your CFV and add them as well, please? cheers, dalibor topic [0] "a list of URLs to specific Mercurial changesets or a Mercurial HTML query which produces the list" On 14.01.2016 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 > Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in > the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 19:02:15 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:02:15 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : 8131665 : Bad exception message in HandshakeHash.getFinishedHash Message-ID: <5697F0B7.5030103@oracle.com> Looking to port this simple fix to jdk8u-dev. Fix applies cleanly post module path unshuffling. bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8131665 JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3704b4f8b2be JDK 9 review : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012571.html -- Regards, Sean. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 19:06:16 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 19:06:16 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] Request for approval : 8131665 : Bad exception message in HandshakeHash.getFinishedHash In-Reply-To: <5697F0B7.5030103@oracle.com> References: <5697F0B7.5030103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5697F1A8.8080803@oracle.com> BAD, brilliant. Approved. -Rob On 14/01/16 19:02, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Looking to port this simple fix to jdk8u-dev. Fix applies cleanly post > module path unshuffling. > > bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8131665 > JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3704b4f8b2be > JDK 9 review : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012571.html > From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Thu Jan 14 19:51:58 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 20:51:58 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5697FC5E.6020607@oracle.com> Hi again, I've added Stefan's committer-refs for jdk8u-dev [0] and jdk9 [-1] below: On 2016-01-14 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 > Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in > the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > [-1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/search/?rev=sjohanss&revcount=200 [0] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=sjohanss&revcount=200 > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Thu Jan 14 20:15:46 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 15:15:46 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8140244 Port fix of JDK-8075773 to AIX and possibly MacOSX In-Reply-To: <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D170@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> References: <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D0D5@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> <56741D93.1000106@oracle.com> <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D170@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> Message-ID: <636568043.8114788.1452802546086.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Done. > > Dan or Jerry, can either of you push it for me? Thanks :) > Did this happen? I see 8075773 in 8u (this fix for Solaris and Linux), but not 8075773. I can push it for you if not. Thanks, -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From david.holmes at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 00:37:56 2016 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:37:56 +1000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8061624 -- [TESTBUG] Some tests cannot be ran under compact profiles and therefore shall be excluded In-Reply-To: <56976CFD.2040909@oracle.com> References: <56966A8D.2070108@oracle.com> <56971C14.70500@oracle.com> <56976CFD.2040909@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56983F64.7090509@oracle.com> Thanks for clarifying. Looks ok. David On 14/01/2016 7:40 PM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: > Hi David, > > Appreciate your feedback. > > Updated review link: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.01/ > > See my comments in-lined. > > 14.01.16 06:55, David Holmes wrote: >> Hi Sergei, >> >> On 14/01/2016 1:17 AM, Sergei Kovalev wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Could somebody approve this patch into jdk8u-dev? >>> >>> Issue record: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061624 >>> Patch review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~skovalev/8061624/webrev.00/ >>> >>> The proposed solution is not applicable for JDK9 forest because it uses >>> module mechanism. >>> >>> Solution: modify TEST.group file to exclude execution of tests on >>> compact profiles. Tests list see below: >>> >>> Required Full JRE: >>> javax/xml/ws/8043129/MailTest.java -- because of MailcapCommandMap >>> component >>> sun/security/pkcs11/Provider/Login.sh -- because of >>> com.sun.security.auth.callback.DialogCallbackHandler >>> javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of >>> javax.xml.bind.annotation.XmlType >> >> I don't see a entry for the above, but I see this: >> >> javax/xml/ws/8046817 >> >> which doesn't seem to exist. > That's really my error. I've removed wrong line. > > javax/xml/bind/jxc/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java covered by > "javax/xml/bind/jxc" (line 352). There are several test cases under the > folder and I'd like to combine them in single line because all of them > have similar requirements. >> >>> Required full JDK: >>> javax/xml/ws/8033113/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary >>> tool >>> javax/xml/ws/ebcdic/WsImportTest.java -- because of wsimport binary >>> tool >>> sun/management/jmxremote/startstop/JMXStartStopTest.java -- because of >>> jcmd binary tool >>> javax/xml/ws/8046817/GenerateEnumSchema.java -- because of schemagen >>> binary tool >> >> You seem to have overlooked adding back javax/xml/crypto to compact2 > The item already listed in the section "needs_compact3" (see line 489). >> >> David >> ----- >> > From staffan.larsen at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 08:23:37 2016 From: staffan.larsen at oracle.com (Staffan Larsen) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:23:37 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <17CE8F32-DFBD-4001-9B2C-4D1E3BA8F88E@oracle.com> Vote: yes > On 14 jan. 2016, at 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html | >> From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 08:55:53 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:55:53 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146967: [TEST_BUG] javax/security/auth/SubjectDomainCombiner/Optimize.java should use 4-args ProtectionDomain constructor Message-ID: <5698B419.7010902@oracle.com> Hello! I'd like to backport this fix, which will make the test more robust. The fix applies cleanly. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146967 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/5f3452a61c4d Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013348.html Would you please approve? Sincerely yours, Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 09:04:11 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:04:11 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8140244 Port fix of JDK-8075773 to AIX and possibly MacOSX In-Reply-To: <636568043.8114788.1452802546086.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D0D5@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> <56741D93.1000106@oracle.com> <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D170@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> <636568043.8114788.1452802546086.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <5698B60B.6070803@oracle.com> Looks like Dan pushed the 8140244 change to jdk8u-dev on the 8th Jan 00:11 GMT. Attached. Regards, Sean. On 14/01/2016 20:15, Andrew Hughes wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> Done. >> >> Dan or Jerry, can either of you push it for me? Thanks :) >> > Did this happen? I see 8075773 in 8u (this fix for Solaris and Linux), > but not 8075773. > > I can push it for you if not. > > Thanks, -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Subject: hg: jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot: 8140244: Port fix of JDK-8075773 to AIX and possibly MacOSX Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 00:11:30 +0000 Size: 3018 URL: From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 09:15:50 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:15:50 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5698B8C6.7090604@oracle.com> Vote: yes Bengt On 2016-01-14 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK > 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll > in the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 10:44:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:44:39 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146967: [TEST_BUG] javax/security/auth/SubjectDomainCombiner/Optimize.java should use 4-args ProtectionDomain constructor In-Reply-To: <5698B419.7010902@oracle.com> References: <5698B419.7010902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5698CD97.8070306@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 15/01/16 08:55, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > I'd like to backport this fix, which will make the test more robust. > The fix applies cleanly. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146967 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/5f3452a61c4d > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013348.html > > Would you please approve? > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 13:06:31 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 16:06:31 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8134007 and 8139751 Message-ID: <5698EED7.1060909@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve the following backports to JDK8u-dev. Both fixes applies cleanly after unshuffling. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134007 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/891db670a8cb JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139751 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/777c5a760a84 No review threads are available for both bugs. With Best Regards, Aleksej From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 13:53:25 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:53:25 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u60-dev forests Message-ID: <5698F9D5.1090209@oracle.com> To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development forests, I'd like to suggest that the jdk8u/jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u/jdk8u60-dev forests be deleted. With 8u60 already GA, these old team development forests are no longer required. If I hear no objections before COB Monday 18th January, I'll ask ops team to delete those forests. regards, Sean. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 14:11:02 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:11:02 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8134007 and 8139751 In-Reply-To: <5698EED7.1060909@oracle.com> References: <5698EED7.1060909@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5698FDF6.4080108@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 15/01/16 13:06, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > Please, approve the following backports to JDK8u-dev. Both fixes > applies cleanly after unshuffling. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134007 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/891db670a8cb > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139751 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/777c5a760a84 > > No review threads are available for both bugs. > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 18:12:25 2016 From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com (serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 10:12:25 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697FC5E.6020607@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> <5697FC5E.6020607@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56993689.1080604@oracle.com> Vote: yes From coleen.phillimore at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 19:18:25 2016 From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com (Coleen Phillimore) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:18:25 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56994601.8040600@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/14/16 11:00 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan > Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer > in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 > Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll > in the JDK 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, > January 28, 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]. Stefan Karlsson [1] > http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > | > From jon.masamitsu at oracle.com Fri Jan 15 19:25:27 2016 From: jon.masamitsu at oracle.com (Jon Masamitsu) Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 11:25:27 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569947A7.7090703@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/14/2016 8:11 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK > 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll > in the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> From srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com Mon Jan 18 06:02:31 2016 From: srikanth.adayapalam at oracle.com (Srikanth) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:32:31 +0530 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval to backport JDK-8130506: javac AssertionError when invoking MethodHandle.invoke with lambda parameter In-Reply-To: <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569C7FF7.2000005@oracle.com> Hello ! Please approve this backport: JDK9 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130506 8u76 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147530 JDK9 change set: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/21b0862fdd32 This patch applies cleanly on 8udev after path shuffling. All relevant tests are green. Thanks in advance. Srikanth From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 18 06:11:06 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:11:06 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval to backport JDK-8130506: javac AssertionError when invoking MethodHandle.invoke with lambda parameter In-Reply-To: <569C7FF7.2000005@oracle.com> References: <849215727.4899968.1452107409827.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <568D6717.5010604@oracle.com> <568DE2D1.8070602@oracle.com> <569C7FF7.2000005@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569C81FA.5090302@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 18/01/16 06:02, Srikanth wrote: > Hello ! > > Please approve this backport: > > JDK9 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130506 > 8u76 ticket: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147530 > > JDK9 change set: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/21b0862fdd32 > > This patch applies cleanly on 8udev after path shuffling. All relevant > tests are green. > > Thanks in advance. > Srikanth From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Mon Jan 18 12:56:14 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 04:56:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized In-Reply-To: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> References: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> Message-ID: <86eaceee-9c8c-4f17-a5f8-285088414caa@default> Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-January/017611.html All relevant tests have been run. Regards, Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 18 13:42:41 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:42:41 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8139424 - SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized In-Reply-To: <86eaceee-9c8c-4f17-a5f8-285088414caa@default> References: <03f5e908-35d3-44f4-aa77-884471e657c6@default> <86eaceee-9c8c-4f17-a5f8-285088414caa@default> Message-ID: <569CEBD1.1070303@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 18/01/16 12:56, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch? > > > > JDK-8139424: SIGSEGV, Problematic frame: # V [libjvm.so+0xd0c0cc] void InstanceKlass::oop_oop_iterate_oop_maps_specialized > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139424 > > backport: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143146 > > original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/636e286dd5da > > public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-January/017611.html > > > > All relevant tests have been run. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi > > From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Mon Jan 18 15:58:42 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:58:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8140244 Port fix of JDK-8075773 to AIX and possibly MacOSX In-Reply-To: <5698B60B.6070803@oracle.com> References: <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D0D5@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> <56741D93.1000106@oracle.com> <0DFD2E72402C9243A8630A7759B27E4338F8D170@DEWDFEMB12B.global.corp.sap> <636568043.8114788.1452802546086.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <5698B60B.6070803@oracle.com> Message-ID: <362425727.9187644.1453132722454.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Looks like Dan pushed the 8140244 change to jdk8u-dev on the 8th Jan > 00:11 GMT. Attached. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 14/01/2016 20:15, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> Done. > >> > >> Dan or Jerry, can either of you push it for me? Thanks :) > >> > > Did this happen? I see 8075773 in 8u (this fix for Solaris and Linux), > > but not 8075773. > > > > I can push it for you if not. > > > > Thanks, > > Yes, it's appeared in the repository now. Thanks, -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Mon Jan 18 15:58:05 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:58:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u60-dev forests In-Reply-To: <5698F9D5.1090209@oracle.com> References: <5698F9D5.1090209@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1413090167.9187441.1453132685631.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development > forests, I'd like to suggest that the jdk8u/jdk8u60-hs and > jdk8u/jdk8u60-dev forests be deleted. With 8u60 already GA, these old > team development forests are no longer required. > > If I hear no objections before COB Monday 18th January, I'll ask ops > team to delete those forests. Do these trees contain history that is not present in other repositories? If so, they should be kept. > > regards, > Sean. > > > -- 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 PGP Key: rsa4096/248BDC07 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07 From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 18 16:03:27 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:03:27 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u60-dev forests In-Reply-To: <1413090167.9187441.1453132685631.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <5698F9D5.1090209@oracle.com> <1413090167.9187441.1453132685631.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <569D0CCF.6020006@oracle.com> On 18/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> To help keep the mercurial server clean of old unnecessary development >> forests, I'd like to suggest that the jdk8u/jdk8u60-hs and >> jdk8u/jdk8u60-dev forests be deleted. With 8u60 already GA, these old >> team development forests are no longer required. >> >> If I hear no objections before COB Monday 18th January, I'll ask ops >> team to delete those forests. > Do these trees contain history that is not present in other repositories? > If so, they should be kept. Short answer is no. All team forest changes eventually wind up in jdk8u (master) regards, Sean. > >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> >> From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:42:29 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:42:29 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo Message-ID: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. Best, Tobias Hartmann [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From michael.haupt at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:43:51 2016 From: michael.haupt at oracle.com (Michael Haupt) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:43:51 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: Vote: yes > Am 19.01.2016 um 09:42 schrieb Tobias Hartmann : > > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. -- 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 is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:45:04 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:45:04 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569DF790.9070903@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 19.01.2016 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote > From roland.westrelin at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:45:52 2016 From: roland.westrelin at oracle.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:45:52 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: Vote: yes Roland. From paul.sandoz at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:50:57 2016 From: paul.sandoz at oracle.com (Paul Sandoz) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:50:57 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <19F5BA8E-DC7E-4597-971A-A854EE28F83D@oracle.com> Vote: yes Paul. From mikael.gerdin at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 08:51:42 2016 From: mikael.gerdin at oracle.com (Mikael Gerdin) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:51:42 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569DF91E.6010800@oracle.com> Vote: yes /Mikael On 2016-01-19 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote > From erik.helin at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 09:20:52 2016 From: erik.helin at oracle.com (Erik Helin) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:20:52 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160119092052.GB25049@ehelin.jrpg.bea.com> Vote: yes Erik On 2016-01-19, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 09:21:20 2016 From: vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com (Vladimir Ivanov) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:21:20 +0300 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E0010.70107@oracle.com> Vote: yes Best regards, Vladimir Ivanov On 1/19/16 11:42 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote > From staffan.larsen at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 09:25:08 2016 From: staffan.larsen at oracle.com (Staffan Larsen) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:25:08 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5EA70DD5-950E-4E8E-9B15-044D97FE0EE4@oracle.com> Vote: yes > On 19 jan. 2016, at 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 09:38:58 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:38:58 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E0432.40601@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanK On 2016-01-19 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From mlists at juma.me.uk Tue Jan 19 09:45:28 2016 From: mlists at juma.me.uk (Ismael Juma) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:45:28 +0000 Subject: JDK9 "SSL" enhancements backport to JDK8 In-Reply-To: References: <564C867D.2010904@Oracle.COM> Message-ID: Hi, The delay of JDK 9 until 2017 seems to make this proposal even more worthwhile. Best, Ismael On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Alen Vre?ko wrote: > Hi, Xuelei. > > To put things into perspective. I ran a simulation of https production > load on the venerable E5620 machines. A simple server client set-up > sending dummy data no other processing overhead. (took care of > coordinated omission). On JDK8u65 the plain old SSLServerSocket code > took literally 50% of all CPU resources. I see a consistent load > factor of ~8 out of 16. Running the same exact bytecode (compiled with > JDK8u65) on JDK9b92, I see a consistent load factor of ~1 out of 16. > That is ~6% of all CPU availability. > > Profiling with YourKit revealed that massive amounts of time are spent > in the crypto (~92%). The ghash#update in particulary screams out on > JDK8. On JDK9 things are significantly better. ghash#update only takes > ~2% CPU time while on JDK8 it takes ~45%. Just some rough ballparks. > > Fundamentally I'd like to see a future JDK8uN to give me a similar > load factor as seen currently with JDK9b92. I am still pretty blown > away with the difference. > > The related commits look pretty self-contained. I'd most probably > botch the job if I backport myself. You're the experts here. ;) > > Thanks. > Alen > > 2015-11-18 15:09 GMT+01:00 Xuelei Fan : > > Hi Alen, > > > > Except JDK-8046943, what else enhancements would you like to see in JDK > 8u? > > What's the requirement for each backport? > > > > Thanks, > > Xuelei > > > > > > On 11/18/2015 1:02 AM, Alen Vre?ko wrote: > >> > >> Hi. > >> > >> Any ideas if/when the enhancement to "SSL" in JDK9 will make it to JDK8? > >> The improvements are quite substantial to say the least. > >> > >> I could not find any info regarding back-porting in > >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046943 > >> and related issues. > >> > >> Best regards. > >> Alen > >> > > > From stefan.johansson at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 10:05:10 2016 From: stefan.johansson at oracle.com (Stefan Johansson) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:05:10 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E0A56.9040302@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanJ On 2016-01-19 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 10:26:40 2016 From: serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com (serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:26:40 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E0F60.80100@oracle.com> Vote: yes From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 11:01:37 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:01:37 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E1791.9080406@oracle.com> Vote: Yes. -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 11:57:57 2016 From: jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:57:57 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E24C5.1000209@oracle.com> Vote: Yes /Jesper Den 19/1/16 kl. 09:42, skrev Tobias Hartmann: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote > From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 13:11:00 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 14:11:00 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E35E4.9080901@oracle.com> Vote: yes Bengt On 2016-01-19 09:42, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 15:40:28 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:40:28 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: JDK-8144131: ArrayData.getInt implementations do not convert to int32 Message-ID: <569E58EC.1000808@oracle.com> Please approve backport of JDK-8144131 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-JDK-8144131 jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/JDK-8144131/webrev/ jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144131/webrev-8u/ jdk8u review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005867.html Manual merging was required in the import section of NumberArrayData.java, otherwise changes apply cleanly after path reshuffling. Thanks, Hannes From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 15:46:48 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 16:46:48 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: JDK-8144131: ArrayData.getInt implementations do not convert to int32 In-Reply-To: <569E58EC.1000808@oracle.com> References: <569E58EC.1000808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E5A68.9080703@oracle.com> Approved. On 19.01.2016 16:40, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Please approve backport of JDK-8144131 to 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-JDK-8144131 > jdk9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/JDK-8144131/webrev/ > jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144131/webrev-8u/ > jdk8u review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005867.html > > Manual merging was required in the import section of > NumberArrayData.java, otherwise changes apply cleanly after path > reshuffling. > > Thanks, > Hannes -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From coleen.phillimore at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 15:49:17 2016 From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com (Coleen Phillimore) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 10:49:17 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E5AFD.8010709@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/19/16 3:42 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 17:09:19 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:09:19 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E6DBF.1030708@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/19/16 12:42 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote > From yumin.qi at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 17:11:30 2016 From: yumin.qi at oracle.com (Yumin Qi) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 09:11:30 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Committer: Zoltan Majo In-Reply-To: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> References: <569DF6F5.60904@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E6E42.6070506@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/19/2016 12:42 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > I hereby nominate Zoltan Majo (zmajo) to JDK 8 Updates Project Committer. > > Zoltan is a member of the HotSpot Compiler Team since 2014 and JDK 9 Committer. During the past two years, Zoltan worked on various parts of Hotspot, including the interpreter, the compilers, and the runtime system. His work mainly targeted JDK 9, but several of his changesets were backported to JDK 8u. > > > Zoltan contributed 11 significant changesets to JDK 8u [1]. > > Votes are due by 12:00 PM EST Tuesday, February 2, 2016. > > Only current JDK 8u Committers [2] are eligible to vote on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this mailing list. > > For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [3]. > > Best, > Tobias Hartmann > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=%28desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20zoltan.majo%40oracle.com%22%29%20or%20desc%28%22Contributed-by%3A%20Zoltan%20Majo%22%29%20or%20author%28zmajo%29%29%20and%20not%20desc%28%22Merge%22%29&revcount=500 > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/census#jdk8u > [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#committer-vote From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 17:46:35 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:46:35 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: JDK-8147630: Wrong test result pushed to 8u-dev Message-ID: <569E767B.9080108@oracle.com> Unfortunately I made a mistake in my backport of JDK-8144131. One test file contained twice the new lines it should have contained. The patch below fixes the problem. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147630 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8147630/webrev/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005870.html Sorry for the inconvenience! Thanks, Hannes From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 17:51:36 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 17:51:36 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: JDK-8147630: Wrong test result pushed to 8u-dev In-Reply-To: <569E767B.9080108@oracle.com> References: <569E767B.9080108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569E77A8.8020302@oracle.com> Approved. Please add the 9-na label to the bug report. Regards, Sean. On 19/01/2016 17:46, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Unfortunately I made a mistake in my backport of JDK-8144131. One test > file contained twice the new lines it should have contained. The patch > below fixes the problem. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147630 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8147630/webrev/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005870.html > > Sorry for the inconvenience! > > Thanks, > Hannes From abhi.saha at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 20:47:57 2016 From: abhi.saha at oracle.com (Abhijit Saha) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 12:47:57 -0800 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for bulk changes from Jan 2016 CPU fixes into 8u76 Message-ID: <569EA0FD.4070708@oracle.com> 8u71/8u72 has been released earlier today [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the changes into the jdk8u forest. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u72-8u76.sync/webrev Thanks Abhijit [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html -- Java Platform Group Oracle Corporation. (408)276-7564 From alen.vrecko at gmail.com Tue Jan 19 20:06:52 2016 From: alen.vrecko at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QWxlbiBWcmXEjWtv?=) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 21:06:52 +0100 Subject: JDK9 "SSL" enhancements backport to JDK8 In-Reply-To: References: <564C867D.2010904@Oracle.COM> Message-ID: Yeah. To be clear. GCM makes the biggest difference. In my tests CBC suites perform pretty similarly (J8/J9). Additionally I tested with simple netty based Java https server that returns 3 MiB file on get request. Used modified (TLSv1.2) wrk2 as the client. For TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256: Java 8: CPU: 100%+ Failed to get 2.4 Gbit out of the machine Java 9: CPU: ~20-25% Easily got 2.4 Gbit out of the machine Used two, a bit dated, 2 x E5620 machines. In short GCM suites perform horribly on Java8. They don't even come close to CBC suites performance. I might even say GCM suites on Java8 are unusable short of hobby programs. On the other hand. For some of my benchmarks Java9 GCM suites take 2x less CPU resouces in respect to comparable CBC suites. Doesn't look like a ton of work to get this backported... Alen 2016-01-19 10:45 GMT+01:00 Ismael Juma : > Hi, > > The delay of JDK 9 until 2017 seems to make this proposal even more > worthwhile. > > Best, > Ismael > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Alen Vre?ko wrote: >> >> Hi, Xuelei. >> >> To put things into perspective. I ran a simulation of https production >> load on the venerable E5620 machines. A simple server client set-up >> sending dummy data no other processing overhead. (took care of >> coordinated omission). On JDK8u65 the plain old SSLServerSocket code >> took literally 50% of all CPU resources. I see a consistent load >> factor of ~8 out of 16. Running the same exact bytecode (compiled with >> JDK8u65) on JDK9b92, I see a consistent load factor of ~1 out of 16. >> That is ~6% of all CPU availability. >> >> Profiling with YourKit revealed that massive amounts of time are spent >> in the crypto (~92%). The ghash#update in particulary screams out on >> JDK8. On JDK9 things are significantly better. ghash#update only takes >> ~2% CPU time while on JDK8 it takes ~45%. Just some rough ballparks. >> >> Fundamentally I'd like to see a future JDK8uN to give me a similar >> load factor as seen currently with JDK9b92. I am still pretty blown >> away with the difference. >> >> The related commits look pretty self-contained. I'd most probably >> botch the job if I backport myself. You're the experts here. ;) >> >> Thanks. >> Alen >> >> 2015-11-18 15:09 GMT+01:00 Xuelei Fan : >> > Hi Alen, >> > >> > Except JDK-8046943, what else enhancements would you like to see in JDK >> > 8u? >> > What's the requirement for each backport? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Xuelei >> > >> > >> > On 11/18/2015 1:02 AM, Alen Vre?ko wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi. >> >> >> >> Any ideas if/when the enhancement to "SSL" in JDK9 will make it to >> >> JDK8? >> >> The improvements are quite substantial to say the least. >> >> >> >> I could not find any info regarding back-porting in >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046943 >> >> and related issues. >> >> >> >> Best regards. >> >> Alen >> >> >> > > > From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Jan 19 20:49:44 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:19:44 +0530 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for bulk changes from Jan 2016 CPU fixes into 8u76 In-Reply-To: <569EA0FD.4070708@oracle.com> References: <569EA0FD.4070708@oracle.com> Message-ID: <569EA168.30504@oracle.com> approved for push into 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck On 2016/01/20 2:17, Abhijit Saha wrote: > 8u71/8u72 has been released earlier today [1]. Requesting approval to > sync up the changes into the jdk8u forest. > > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u72-8u76.sync/webrev > > > Thanks > Abhijit > > > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html > > From bengt.rutisson at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 09:15:16 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:15:16 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin Message-ID: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> 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 Jan 21 09:15:20 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:15:20 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin Message-ID: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> 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 Jan 21 09:15:25 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:15:25 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl Message-ID: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> 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 Jan 21 09:16:22 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:16:22 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0A1E6.6080009@oracle.com> Vote: yes 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 staffan.larsen at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 09:17:14 2016 From: staffan.larsen at oracle.com (Staffan Larsen) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:17:14 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <02DB674B-AAA5-4328-807C-9D1D9E920B21@oracle.com> Vote: yes > On 21 jan. 2016, at 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 staffan.larsen at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 09:17:20 2016 From: staffan.larsen at oracle.com (Staffan Larsen) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:17:20 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <88534464-4D83-422D-B343-8B75B01A14E9@oracle.com> Vote: yes > On 21 jan. 2016, at 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 staffan.larsen at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 09:17:26 2016 From: staffan.larsen at oracle.com (Staffan Larsen) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:17:26 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1D73B7A1-6CF9-42C9-923F-A3F75B16F609@oracle.com> Vote: yes > On 21 jan. 2016, at 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 Jan 21 09:16:44 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:16:44 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0A1FC.2010109@oracle.com> Vote: yes Bengt 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 Jan 21 09:17:03 2016 From: bengt.rutisson at oracle.com (Bengt Rutisson) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:17:03 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <02DB674B-AAA5-4328-807C-9D1D9E920B21@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> <02DB674B-AAA5-4328-807C-9D1D9E920B21@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0A20F.6020409@oracle.com> Vote: yes Bengt On 2016-01-21 10:17, Staffan Larsen wrote: > Vote: yes > >> On 21 jan. 2016, at 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 sgehwolf at redhat.com Thu Jan 21 10:30:09 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:30:09 +0100 Subject: [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly Message-ID: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> Hi, Could somebody please review and sponsor this small 8u bugfix? This bug has been introduced with the January 2016 CPU fixes (JDK-8130710) and I've not seen this code in JDK 9 (yet?). Hence, posting this here. Bug:?https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 webrev:?http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.01/ The fix for non-public bug JDK-8130710 uses Collectors.joining() for assembling the list of attribute names when they get logged. However, the arguments are passed in to Collectors.joining() incorrectly, which results in log messages like this: attribute names=', FirstName[LastName]' where it should be this: attribute names='[FirstName, LastName]' The fix is to swap the arg for the delimiter and the prefix args. I've included a regression test. Testing done: jdk_jmx tests fail without the fix and pass after. Thoughts? Thanks, Severin From jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 11:01:26 2016 From: jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com (Jaroslav Bachorik) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:01:26 +0100 Subject: [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> On 21.1.2016 11:30, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > Hi, > > Could somebody please review and sponsor this small 8u bugfix? This bug > has been introduced with the January 2016 CPU fixes (JDK-8130710) and > I've not seen this code in JDK 9 (yet?). Hence, posting this here. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.01/ > > The fix for non-public bug JDK-8130710 uses Collectors.joining() for > assembling the list of attribute names when they get logged. However, > the arguments are passed in to Collectors.joining() incorrectly, which > results in log messages like this: > > attribute names=', FirstName[LastName]' > > where it should be this: > > attribute names='[FirstName, LastName]' > > The fix is to swap the arg for the delimiter and the prefix args. I've > included a regression test. > > Testing done: jdk_jmx tests fail without the fix and pass after. > > Thoughts? Nice catch. And good work fixing it with a nice test! Looks good, not a JDK 8 *R*eviewer, though. -JB- > > Thanks, > Severin > From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 11:36:48 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:36:48 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0C2D0.2060401@oracle.com> Vote: Yes. -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 11:38:25 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:38:25 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0C331.5040606@oracle.com> Vote: Yes. -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 11:40:20 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:40:20 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0C3A4.4060405@oracle.com> Vote: Yes. -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 12:44:46 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 12:44:46 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] 8064330 - Remove SHA224 from the default support list if SunMSCAPI enabled Message-ID: <56A0D2BE.4010400@oracle.com> Hi folks, looking for approval for this fix: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8064330 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013352.html http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8064330/webrev.01/ -Rob From thomas.schatzl at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 12:47:12 2016 From: thomas.schatzl at oracle.com (Thomas Schatzl) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:47:12 +0100 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8147087 - Race when reusing PerRegionTable bitmaps may result in dropped remembered set entries Message-ID: <1453380432.2254.13.camel@oracle.com> Hi all, I would like to ask for approval to push the change for JDK-8147087 to 8u. It fixes a P1 crash in the G1 collector that occurs in certain situations due to a race in how remembered set entries are added to the remembered sets. CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147087 Review thread link: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/0162 63.html (JDK8) http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/0162 44.html (JDK9) Unfortunately there has been no chance for me to push this to jdk9/hs -rt first in time because there is an internal stabilization lock-down of the repo in progress at the moment. For this reason I am asking to be allowed to push it to jdk8u first to meet the rampdown 2 deadline. This change has been tested thoroughly internally using the reproducing stress test on all platforms without that issue occurring. In any case, since the essence of the change is reordering assignments to variables in one place when adding remembered sets, the impact to any unrelated components is very unlikely. Thanks, Thomas From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 12:53:45 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 13:53:45 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] 8064330 - Remove SHA224 from the default support list if SunMSCAPI enabled In-Reply-To: <56A0D2BE.4010400@oracle.com> References: <56A0D2BE.4010400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0D4D9.3060606@oracle.com> Approved. cheers, dalibor topic On 21.01.2016 13:44, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi folks, looking for approval for this fix: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8064330 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2016-January/013352.html > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~robm/8064330/webrev.01/ > > -Rob -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From harold.seigel at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 13:27:16 2016 From: harold.seigel at oracle.com (harold seigel) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:27:16 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0DCB4.6070406@oracle.com> Vote: yes Harold On 1/21/2016 4:15 AM, 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 harold.seigel at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 13:27:27 2016 From: harold.seigel at oracle.com (harold seigel) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:27:27 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0DCBF.5030202@oracle.com> Vote: yes Harold On 1/21/2016 4:15 AM, 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 harold.seigel at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 13:27:36 2016 From: harold.seigel at oracle.com (harold seigel) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:27:36 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0DCC8.7050200@oracle.com> Vote: yes Harold On 1/21/2016 4:15 AM, 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 Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 13:31:58 2016 From: Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com (Sergey Bylokhov) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 16:31:58 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8080492 [Parfait] Uninitialised variable in jdk/src/java/desktop/windows/native/libawt/ Message-ID: <56A0DDCE.3020701@oracle.com> Hello, This is a direct back port from jdk9 to jdk 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8080492 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/8625ef32d00c Reviewers: Phil Race, Vadim Pakhnushev -- Best regards, Sergey. From coleen.phillimore at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 14:02:12 2016 From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com (Coleen Phillimore) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:02:12 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0E4E4.9000002@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 4:15 AM, 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 coleen.phillimore at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 14:02:19 2016 From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com (Coleen Phillimore) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:02:19 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0E4EB.6040801@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 4:15 AM, 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 coleen.phillimore at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 14:02:31 2016 From: coleen.phillimore at oracle.com (Coleen Phillimore) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:02:31 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0E4F7.3030306@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 4:15 AM, 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 sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 14:10:04 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:10:04 +0000 Subject: [8u76] Request for approval for CR 8147087 - Race when reusing PerRegionTable bitmaps may result in dropped remembered set entries In-Reply-To: <1453380432.2254.13.camel@oracle.com> References: <1453380432.2254.13.camel@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0E6BC.3060804@oracle.com> Since you already have plans to address this in JDK 9, pushing to jdk8u-dev now won't be a problem. Approved. This should automatically make 8u76 - Rob will be taking final pre-RDP2 snapshot for master sync in coming days. Regards, Sean. On 21/01/2016 12:47, Thomas Schatzl wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to ask for approval to push the change for JDK-8147087 > to 8u. > > It fixes a P1 crash in the G1 collector that occurs in certain > situations due to a race in how remembered set entries are added to the > remembered sets. > > CR: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147087 > > Review thread link: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/0162 > 63.html (JDK8) > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/0162 > 44.html (JDK9) > > Unfortunately there has been no chance for me to push this to jdk9/hs > -rt first in time because there is an internal stabilization lock-down > of the repo in progress at the moment. > > For this reason I am asking to be allowed to push it to jdk8u first to > meet the rampdown 2 deadline. > > This change has been tested thoroughly internally using the reproducing > stress test on all platforms without that issue occurring. > > In any case, since the essence of the change is reordering assignments > to variables in one place when adding remembered sets, the impact to > any unrelated components is very unlikely. > > Thanks, > Thomas > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 14:11:08 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 14:11:08 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8080492 [Parfait] Uninitialised variable in jdk/src/java/desktop/windows/native/libawt/ In-Reply-To: <56A0DDCE.3020701@oracle.com> References: <56A0DDCE.3020701@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0E6FC.2000008@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 21/01/2016 13:31, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: > Hello, > This is a direct back port from jdk9 to jdk 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8080492 > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/8625ef32d00c > > Reviewers: Phil Race, Vadim Pakhnushev > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Thu Jan 21 14:20:56 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:20:56 +0100 Subject: [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? Thanks, Severin On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 12:01 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 21.1.2016 11:30, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Could somebody please review and sponsor this small 8u bugfix? This bug > > has been introduced with the January 2016 CPU fixes (JDK-8130710) and > > I've not seen this code in JDK 9 (yet?). Hence, posting this here. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.01/ > > > > The fix for non-public bug JDK-8130710 uses Collectors.joining() for > > assembling the list of attribute names when they get logged. However, > > the arguments are passed in to Collectors.joining() incorrectly, which > > results in log messages like this: > > > > attribute names=', FirstName[LastName]' > > > > where it should be this: > > > > attribute names='[FirstName, LastName]' > > > > The fix is to swap the arg for the delimiter and the prefix args. I've > > included a regression test. > > > > Testing done: jdk_jmx tests fail without the fix and pass after. > > > > Thoughts? > > Nice catch. And good work fixing it with a nice test! > Looks good, not a JDK 8 *R*eviewer, though. > > -JB- > > > > > Thanks, > > Severin > > > From karen.kinnear at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:01:59 2016 From: karen.kinnear at oracle.com (Karen Kinnear) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:01:59 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697FC5E.6020607@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> <5697FC5E.6020607@oracle.com> Message-ID: <612A2C58-1C39-44C2-BDD8-E1C73AF2B6FC@oracle.com> Vote: yes Karen > On Jan 14, 2016, at 2:51 PM, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > > Hi again, > > I've added Stefan's committer-refs for jdk8u-dev [0] and jdk9 [-1] below: > > On 2016-01-14 17:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] >> >> I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. >> >> Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a >> Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 >> Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in >> the JDK 8 Updates Project. >> >> Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. >> >> Stefan Karlsson >> > > [-1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/search/?rev=sjohanss&revcount=200 > [0] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/hotspot/search/?rev=sjohanss&revcount=200 > >> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census >> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote >> [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> >> On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >>> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >>> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >>> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >>> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >>> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >>> 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]. >>> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >>> >>> [4] >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >>> | From karen.kinnear at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:02:53 2016 From: karen.kinnear at oracle.com (Karen Kinnear) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:02:53 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: vote: yes thanks, Karen > On Jan 21, 2016, at 4:15 AM, 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 karen.kinnear at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:03:13 2016 From: karen.kinnear at oracle.com (Karen Kinnear) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:03:13 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: vote: yes thanks, Karen > On Jan 21, 2016, at 4:15 AM, 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 karen.kinnear at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:03:37 2016 From: karen.kinnear at oracle.com (Karen Kinnear) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:03:37 -0500 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <75D874E7-3E2B-481A-A024-8CF852F7797E@oracle.com> vote: yes thanks, Karen > On Jan 21, 2016, at 4:15 AM, 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 daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:41:27 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:41:27 -0700 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0FC27.1050101@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 2:15 AM, 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 daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:41:36 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:41:36 -0700 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0FC30.1040904@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 2:15 AM, 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 daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:41:51 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:41:51 -0700 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0FC3F.1010505@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 2:15 AM, 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 daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 15:43:03 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 08:43:03 -0700 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson In-Reply-To: <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> References: <5697C61A.20101@oracle.com> <5697C8C8.8020400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A0FC87.7000005@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/14/16 9:11 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote: > [resending with (hopefully) correct formatting] > > I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. > > Stefan Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a > Reviewer in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK > 9 Project makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll > in the JDK 8 Updates Project. > > Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, 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]. > > Stefan Karlsson > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote > [3] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html > [4] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html > > On 2016-01-14 17:00, Stefan Karlsson wrote: >> |I hereby nominate Stefan Johansson to JDK 8 Updates Reviewer. Stefan >> Johansson is an experienced JDK 8 Updates Committer [3] and a Reviewer >> in the JDK 9 Project [4]. His experience as a Reviewer in JDK 9 Project >> makes me confident that he is suitable for the Reviewer roll in the JDK >> 8 Updates Project. Votes are due by 5:00 PM CET, Thursday, January 28, >> 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]. >> Stefan Karlsson [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census [2] >> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/#reviewer-vote [3] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2014-November/002544.html >> >> [4] >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-November/003025.html >> | >> > From daniel.fuchs at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 17:03:43 2016 From: daniel.fuchs at oracle.com (Daniel Fuchs) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 18:03:43 +0100 Subject: [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? Looks good to me Severin. best regards, -- daniel > > Thanks, > Severin > > On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 12:01 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> On 21.1.2016 11:30, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Could somebody please review and sponsor this small 8u bugfix? This bug >>> has been introduced with the January 2016 CPU fixes (JDK-8130710) and >>> I've not seen this code in JDK 9 (yet?). Hence, posting this here. >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 >>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.01/ >>> >>> The fix for non-public bug JDK-8130710 uses Collectors.joining() for >>> assembling the list of attribute names when they get logged. However, >>> the arguments are passed in to Collectors.joining() incorrectly, which >>> results in log messages like this: >>> >>> attribute names=', FirstName[LastName]' >>> >>> where it should be this: >>> >>> attribute names='[FirstName, LastName]' >>> >>> The fix is to swap the arg for the delimiter and the prefix args. I've >>> included a regression test. >>> >>> Testing done: jdk_jmx tests fail without the fix and pass after. >>> >>> Thoughts? >> >> Nice catch. And good work fixing it with a nice test! >> Looks good, not a JDK 8 *R*eviewer, though. >> >> -JB- >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Severin >>> >> > From jon.masamitsu at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 17:22:55 2016 From: jon.masamitsu at oracle.com (Jon Masamitsu) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:22:55 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A113EF.6020309@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 01/21/2016 01:15 AM, 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 jon.masamitsu at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 17:23:12 2016 From: jon.masamitsu at oracle.com (Jon Masamitsu) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:23:12 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A11400.8080806@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 01/21/2016 01:15 AM, 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 jon.masamitsu at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 17:23:30 2016 From: jon.masamitsu at oracle.com (Jon Masamitsu) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:23:30 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A11412.5030608@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 01/21/2016 01:15 AM, 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 vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 18:36:18 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:36:18 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A12522.3070906@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 1:15 AM, 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 vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 18:36:28 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:36:28 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A1252C.6030601@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 1:15 AM, 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 vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 18:36:41 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 10:36:41 -0800 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A12539.3000301@oracle.com> Vote: yes On 1/21/16 1:15 AM, 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 aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 21:25:09 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 00:25:09 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8068254: Method reference uses wrong qualifying type Message-ID: <56A14CB5.4030909@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve JDK-8068254 backport to JDK8u-dev. Fix applies cleanly after unshuffling. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068254 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/4359df35c893 No review thread is available for this bug. With Best Regards, Aleksej From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 21 22:38:16 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:38:16 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8068254: Method reference uses wrong qualifying type In-Reply-To: <56A14CB5.4030909@oracle.com> References: <56A14CB5.4030909@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A15DD8.9070909@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 21/01/2016 21:25, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > Please, approve JDK-8068254 backport to JDK8u-dev. Fix applies cleanly > after unshuffling. > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068254 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/4359df35c893 > No review thread is available for this bug. > > With Best Regards, > Aleksej From jayathirth.d.v at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 06:29:43 2016 From: jayathirth.d.v at oracle.com (Jayathirth D V) Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:29:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u76]:Request for approval to backport: 8041501 : ImageIO reader is not capable of reading JPEGs without JFIF header Message-ID: <56dffbd7-d477-4bcc-aa97-865e2f60fc73@default> Hi, Please approve this 8u backport request : the fix is identical to the JDK 9 fix. Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041501 JDK 8u Webrev : HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejdv/8041501.8u/webrev.00/"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jdv/8041501.8u/webrev.00/ JDK8 backport review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2016-January/006212.html JDK 9 review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2015-November/005902.html JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/de7c47b7b8a6 Thanks, Jay From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 08:06:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 08:06:39 +0000 Subject: [8u76]:Request for approval to backport: 8041501 : ImageIO reader is not capable of reading JPEGs without JFIF header In-Reply-To: <56dffbd7-d477-4bcc-aa97-865e2f60fc73@default> References: <56dffbd7-d477-4bcc-aa97-865e2f60fc73@default> Message-ID: <56A1E30F.3040507@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/2016 06:29, Jayathirth D V wrote: > Hi, > > > > Please approve this 8u backport request : the fix is identical to the JDK 9 fix. > > Bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041501 > > JDK 8u Webrev : HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejdv/8041501.8u/webrev.00/"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jdv/8041501.8u/webrev.00/ > > JDK8 backport review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2016-January/006212.html > > JDK 9 review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2015-November/005902.html > > JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/de7c47b7b8a6 > > > > Thanks, > > Jay From sgehwolf at redhat.com Fri Jan 22 08:58:35 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:58:35 +0100 Subject: [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1453453115.3769.3.camel@redhat.com> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 18:03 +0100, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? > > Looks good to me Severin. Thank you, Daniel! Cheers, Severin > best regards, > > -- daniel > > > > Thanks, > > Severin > > > > On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 12:01 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > > > On 21.1.2016 11:30, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Could somebody please review and sponsor this small 8u bugfix? This bug > > > > has been introduced with the January 2016 CPU fixes (JDK-8130710) and > > > > I've not seen this code in JDK 9 (yet?). Hence, posting this here. > > > > > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 > > > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.01/ > > > > > > > > The fix for non-public bug JDK-8130710 uses Collectors.joining() for > > > > assembling the list of attribute names when they get logged. However, > > > > the arguments are passed in to Collectors.joining() incorrectly, which > > > > results in log messages like this: > > > > > > > > attribute names=', FirstName[LastName]' > > > > > > > > where it should be this: > > > > > > > > attribute names='[FirstName, LastName]' > > > > > > > > The fix is to swap the arg for the delimiter and the prefix args. I've > > > > included a regression test. > > > > > > > > Testing done: jdk_jmx tests fail without the fix and pass after. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Nice catch. And good work fixing it with a nice test! > > > Looks good, not a JDK 8 *R*eviewer, though. > > > > > > -JB- > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Severin > > > > > > > > > > From boris.molodenkov at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 10:16:49 2016 From: boris.molodenkov at oracle.com (Boris Molodenkov) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 13:16:49 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8002116 Message-ID: <56A20191.2090802@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport fix for JDK-8002116 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8002116 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/fdba918439a3 Review thread for original fix: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013920.html Thanks, Boris From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 11:31:32 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 11:31:32 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8002116 In-Reply-To: <56A20191.2090802@oracle.com> References: <56A20191.2090802@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A21314.4020605@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 10:16, Boris Molodenkov wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to backport fix for JDK-8002116 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8002116 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/fdba918439a3 > Review thread for original fix: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-January/013920.html > > > Thanks, > Boris > From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 13:57:58 2016 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:57:58 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8036132 Message-ID: <56A23566.7000106@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport fix for JDK-8036132 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036132 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/81115e341c57 Thanks, Konstantin From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 13:59:19 2016 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:59:19 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8044419 Message-ID: <56A235B7.7000300@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport fix for JDK-8044419 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044419 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4be838061c3b Thanks, Konstantin From konstantin.shefov at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:00:26 2016 From: konstantin.shefov at oracle.com (Konstantin Shefov) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:00:26 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8074146 Message-ID: <56A235FA.3030202@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport fix for JDK-8074146 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074146 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/9fa549e06f83 Thanks, Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:28:33 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:28:33 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8036132 In-Reply-To: <56A23566.7000106@oracle.com> References: <56A23566.7000106@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A23C91.2010001@oracle.com> Please include a link to the code review for future requests : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-March/014399.html Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 13:57, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to backport fix for JDK-8036132 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036132 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/81115e341c57 > > Thanks, > Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:29:27 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:29:27 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8044419 In-Reply-To: <56A235B7.7000300@oracle.com> References: <56A235B7.7000300@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A23CC7.1040601@oracle.com> Review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-January/016433.html Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 13:59, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to backport fix for JDK-8044419 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044419 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4be838061c3b > > Thanks, > Konstantin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:30:16 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:30:16 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8074146 In-Reply-To: <56A235FA.3030202@oracle.com> References: <56A235FA.3030202@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A23CF8.9070804@oracle.com> Review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2015-April/017117.html Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 14:00, Konstantin Shefov wrote: > Hi All, > > I would like to backport fix for JDK-8074146 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074146 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/9fa549e06f83 > > Thanks, > Konstantin From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:48:41 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:48:41 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8144020: Remove long as an internal numeric type Message-ID: <56A24149.9030301@oracle.com> Please approve backport of 8144020 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144020 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144020/webrev-8u/ 9 webrev: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144020/webrev.01/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005876.html Some manual merging was necessary as explained in the review thread. Thanks, Hannes From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Jan 22 14:50:04 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 09:50:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? > > Looks good to me Severin. > It looks good to me also; I already included the equivalent change (using the OpenJDK 7 libraries rather than Collectors) in the backport to 7. I can push this, but I think you still need an 8u maintainer to approve it. Also, I feel it should maybe go to 9 first. Does anyone know when the security patches will appear there? > best regards, > > -- daniel Thanks, -- 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 sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 14:59:40 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:59:40 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8144020: Remove long as an internal numeric type In-Reply-To: <56A24149.9030301@oracle.com> References: <56A24149.9030301@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A243DC.9000909@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 14:48, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Please approve backport of 8144020 to 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144020 > 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144020/webrev-8u/ > 9 webrev: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8144020/webrev.01/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005876.html > > Some manual merging was necessary as explained in the review thread. > > Thanks, > Hannes From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 15:02:04 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:02:04 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8143896: java.lang.Long is implicitly converted to double Message-ID: <56A2446C.8030800@oracle.com> Please approve backport of 8143896 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143896 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8143896/webrev-8u/ 9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8143896/webrev.03/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005878.html Some merging was necessary as explained in the review thread. Thanks, Hannes From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 15:23:38 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:23:38 +0000 Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> On 22/01/16 14:50, Andrew Hughes wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: >>> Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? >> Looks good to me Severin. >> > It looks good to me also; I already included the equivalent change (using > the OpenJDK 7 libraries rather than Collectors) in the backport to 7. > > I can push this, but I think you still need an 8u maintainer to approve it. > > Also, I feel it should maybe go to 9 first. Does anyone know when the > security patches will appear there? January CPU patches are already in the JDK 9 dev forest. Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration approval request. regards, Sean. > >> best regards, >> >> -- daniel > Thanks, From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 15:24:50 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:24:50 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8143896: java.lang.Long is implicitly converted to double In-Reply-To: <56A2446C.8030800@oracle.com> References: <56A2446C.8030800@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A249C2.1060604@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 15:02, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Please approve backport of 8143896 to 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143896 > 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8143896/webrev-8u/ > 9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8143896/webrev.03/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005878.html > > Some merging was necessary as explained in the review thread. > > Thanks, > Hannes From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 15:30:26 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:30:26 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8147845: Varargs Array functions still leaking longs Message-ID: <56A24B12.10705@oracle.com> Please approve backport of 8147845 to 8u-dev. This is the last backport in this series. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147845 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8147845/webrev/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005879.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. Thanks, Hannes From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 15:34:09 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:34:09 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8147845: Varargs Array functions still leaking longs In-Reply-To: <56A24B12.10705@oracle.com> References: <56A24B12.10705@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A24BF1.90105@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 22/01/16 15:30, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Please approve backport of 8147845 to 8u-dev. This is the last > backport in this series. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147845 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8147845/webrev/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005879.html > > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. > > Thanks, > Hannes From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Jan 22 15:58:58 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 10:58:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On 22/01/16 14:50, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > >>> Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? > >> Looks good to me Severin. > >> > > It looks good to me also; I already included the equivalent change (using > > the OpenJDK 7 libraries rather than Collectors) in the backport to 7. > > > > I can push this, but I think you still need an 8u maintainer to approve it. > > > > Also, I feel it should maybe go to 9 first. Does anyone know when the > > security patches will appear there? > January CPU patches are already in the JDK 9 dev forest. > Ah is this the usual place they appear first? I was looking in jdk9/jdk9. > Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html > > In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to > serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push > to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration > approval request. I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed it already. I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised this with Severin. > > regards, > Sean. > > > >> best regards, > >> > >> -- daniel > > Thanks, > > -- 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 sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 16:49:32 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 16:49:32 +0000 Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> On 22/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: >> >Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: >> >http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html >> > >> >In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to >> >serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push >> >to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration >> >approval request. > I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. > Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed > it already. > > I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised > this with Severin. I'm not sure. Everyone reviews and fixes in JDK 9 first and then backports where necessary. Since this was also reviewed on serviceability-dev, I think you might not need another round of reviews. regards, Sean. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 17:40:29 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 17:40:29 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8062901: Iterators is spelled incorrectly in the Javadoc for Spliterator Message-ID: <56A2698D.70805@oracle.com> Would like to backport this simple typo correction to jdk8u-dev. Applies cleanly. JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/1c49c73398b2 Bug record : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062901 review : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030876.html -- Regards, Sean. From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Fri Jan 22 17:45:24 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:45:24 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8062901: Iterators is spelled incorrectly in the Javadoc for Spliterator In-Reply-To: <56A2698D.70805@oracle.com> References: <56A2698D.70805@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A26AB4.8010307@oracle.com> Approved. On 22.01.2016 18:40, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Would like to backport this simple typo correction to jdk8u-dev. Applies > cleanly. > > JDK 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/1c49c73398b2 > Bug record : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8062901 > review : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030876.html > > -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Fri Jan 22 17:47:32 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:47:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1151836098.11296241.1453484852720.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > > On 22/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: > >> >Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: > >> >http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html > >> > > >> >In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to > >> >serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push > >> >to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration > >> >approval request. > > I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. > > Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed > > it already. > > > > I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised > > this with Severin. > I'm not sure. Everyone reviews and fixes in JDK 9 first and then > backports where necessary. Since this was also reviewed on > serviceability-dev, I think you might not need another round of reviews. > > regards, > Sean. > > Ok, I pushed the change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/452162be5da9 I know it's not the ideal way around to do this, but if it had been a case of three people reviewing it in 9, and it applying to 8 with an unshuffle, a re-review wouldn't have been required. Hence, I'm taking it as the same this way around, but in future, Severin, please always post to 9 first unless it really is inapplicable there. Also, the actual fix is just a one-line typo correction :-) Most of the changeset is a test case for it, and I built and ran the test before pushing. Thanks, -- 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 jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 08:41:24 2016 From: jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com (Jaroslav Bachorik) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:41:24 +0100 Subject: jmx-dev [8] RFR(S): 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A5DFB4.3050901@oracle.com> On 22.1.2016 17:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > On 22/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: >>> >Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: >>> >http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html >>> > >>> >In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to >>> >serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push >>> >to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration >>> >approval request. >> I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. >> Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed >> it already. >> >> I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised >> this with Severin. > I'm not sure. Everyone reviews and fixes in JDK 9 first and then > backports where necessary. Since this was also reviewed on > serviceability-dev, I think you might not need another round of reviews. The changeset targeted by this fix was only in JDK 9 CPU until very recently. Therefore it was not really possible for an external contributor to develop a patch against JDK 9. JDK 8 CPU changes, on the other hand, have already been upsynced to JDK 8 Dev. -JB- > > regards, > Sean. > From sgehwolf at redhat.com Mon Jan 25 09:43:12 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:43:12 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A5DFB4.3050901@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> <56A5DFB4.3050901@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1453714992.3466.8.camel@redhat.com> On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 09:41 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: > On 22.1.2016 17:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > > > On 22/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > > > > Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: > > > > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html > > > > > > > > > > In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to > > > > > serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net??for review and once reviewed, push > > > > > to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration > > > > > approval request. > > > I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. > > > Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed > > > it already. > > > > > > I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised > > > this with Severin. > > I'm not sure. Everyone reviews and fixes in JDK 9 first and then > > backports where necessary. Since this was also reviewed on > > serviceability-dev, I think you might not need another round of reviews. > > The changeset targeted by this fix was only in JDK 9 CPU until very? > recently. Therefore it was not really possible for an external? > contributor to develop a patch against JDK 9. JDK 8 CPU changes, on the? > other hand, have already been upsynced to JDK 8 Dev. Since this has been pushed to 9 now, OK to to go to JDK 8u as well? The change is the same as for 9 after unshuffling. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.02/ Since I'd need a sponsor for pushing this, I'm attaching the hg- exported changeset as well. Thanks, Severin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JDK-8147857.export.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 13366 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 09:59:37 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:59:37 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type Message-ID: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> Hi, please approve and review the following backport to 8u. 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. Thanks, Tobias From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 10:31:42 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:31:42 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <1453714992.3466.8.camel@redhat.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> <56A5DFB4.3050901@oracle.com> <1453714992.3466.8.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A5F98E.90202@oracle.com> Approved. I can push this change for you. I'll push it through out testing framework (JPRT) first. Regards, Sean. On 25/01/16 09:43, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 09:41 +0100, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> On 22.1.2016 17:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> On 22/01/16 15:58, Andrew Hughes wrote: >>>>>> Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: >>>>>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html >>>>>> >>>>>> In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to >>>>>> serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push >>>>>> to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration >>>>>> approval request. >>>> I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. >>>> Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed >>>> it already. >>>> >>>> I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised >>>> this with Severin. >>> I'm not sure. Everyone reviews and fixes in JDK 9 first and then >>> backports where necessary. Since this was also reviewed on >>> serviceability-dev, I think you might not need another round of reviews. >> The changeset targeted by this fix was only in JDK 9 CPU until very >> recently. Therefore it was not really possible for an external >> contributor to develop a patch against JDK 9. JDK 8 CPU changes, on the >> other hand, have already been upsynced to JDK 8 Dev. > Since this has been pushed to 9 now, OK to to go to JDK 8u as well? The > change is the same as for 9 after unshuffling. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147857 > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-8147857/webrev.02/ > > Since I'd need a sponsor for pushing this, I'm attaching the hg- > exported changeset as well. > > Thanks, > Severin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 10:34:03 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 10:34:03 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A5FA1B.2070000@oracle.com> Approved but subject to peer code review before pushing. Regards, Sean. On 25/01/16 09:59, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de > > The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ > > I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. > > Thanks, > Tobias From sgehwolf at redhat.com Mon Jan 25 10:34:14 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 11:34:14 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8147857: RMIConnector logs attribute names incorrectly In-Reply-To: <56A5F98E.90202@oracle.com> References: <1453372209.4628.9.camel@redhat.com> <56A0BA86.20306@oracle.com> <1453386056.4628.29.camel@redhat.com> <56A10F6F.7000601@oracle.com> <599245366.11175574.1453474204467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A2497A.9030801@oracle.com> <1303284132.11220786.1453478338493.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <56A25D9C.10600@oracle.com> <56A5DFB4.3050901@oracle.com> <1453714992.3466.8.camel@redhat.com> <56A5F98E.90202@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1453718054.3466.9.camel@redhat.com> On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 10:31 +0000, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved. I can push this change for you. I'll push it through out? > testing framework (JPRT) first. Thank you, Sean. Much appreciated. Cheers, Severin From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 11:27:43 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 12:27:43 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A5FA1B.2070000@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> <56A5FA1B.2070000@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A606AF.4010500@oracle.com> Thanks, Sean. Best, Tobias On 25.01.2016 11:34, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved but subject to peer code review before pushing. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 25/01/16 09:59, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >> >> 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de >> >> The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ >> >> I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias > From maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 14:21:34 2016 From: maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com (Maurizio Cimadamore) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 14:21:34 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] request for review and approval to backport JDK-8130304: Inference: NodeNotFoundException thrown with deep generic method call chain In-Reply-To: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> References: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> Hello, I'd like to ask for a code review and an approval to backport the following fix to 8u-dev: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130304 jdk9 fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/70c852df047c The fix does not apply cleanly to 8u-dev/langtools. A webrev for the patch updated for 8u-dev is here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8130304/ The changes between the jdk9 and 8u-dev fixes are to adjust some typing issues in the TarjanNode class (since the hierarchy has slightly different generic type signatures in JDK 9). Thanks Maurizio From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 17:49:57 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:49:57 -0800 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A66045.9050200@oracle.com> RFR for 8u should use original 6675699 bug id and also use it in 8u the changeset comment: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 parse2.cpp I noticed that JDK9 change remove -1 from "num_cases-1". Was it intentional? graphKit.cpp fast_size_limit is used in jdk9 but not in 8u. Why? Thanks, Vladimir On 1/25/16 1:59 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi, > > please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de > > The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ > > I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. > > Thanks, > Tobias > From omajid at redhat.com Mon Jan 25 20:13:43 2016 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 15:13:43 -0500 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <56951CAC.40903@oracle.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> <569511D4.6030708@oracle.com> <56951CAC.40903@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160125201343.GA3839@redhat.com> Hi, * Alex Menkov [2016-01-12 10:33]: > I don't think this requires CCC - Synthesizer with default sounbank > generated sounds before and will generate after the fix. > The sounds will be different (better quality), but there is no behavior > change. I am not familiar with how the CCC operates. Should I wait for an explicit approval from someone before I push this? Or will this not go up to the CCC? Thanks, Omair -- PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681 From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 20:14:12 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 23:14:12 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146192: Add test for JDK-8049321 In-Reply-To: <567BE5CB.1060301@oracle.com> References: <567BDBB1.7050901@oracle.com> <567BE5CB.1060301@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A68214.8070709@oracle.com> Hi all! Would you please approve the backport of this fix, which augments the fix for 8049321 by adding a regression test? With the fix for 8049321, the added test passes on all tested platforms. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146192 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/f9a4a8cbbf49 Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-December/013248.html Sincerely yours, Ivan On 24.12.2015 15:32, Sean Coffey wrote: > Looks fine Ivan. Approved for jdk8u-dev. > > Looks like the JDK 9 bug record needs a noreg- label. > > regards, > Sean. > > > On 24/12/2015 11:49, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >> Hello! >> >> Would you please approve backporting this enhancement, which turn on >> support of two signature algorithms in JSSE. >> The fix did not apply cleanly due to some changes around that code, >> but modifications are quite straight-forward. >> I assume the code will need some adjustments, if JDK-8064330 is >> decided to be ported back to jdk8u. >> >> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049321 >> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8049321/00/webrev/ >> Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/65f45c833654 >> Jdk9 review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-December/013215.html >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Ivan >> > > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 22:10:59 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:10:59 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport: 8146192: Add test for JDK-8049321 In-Reply-To: <56A68214.8070709@oracle.com> References: <567BDBB1.7050901@oracle.com> <567BE5CB.1060301@oracle.com> <56A68214.8070709@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A69D73.6090506@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 25/01/16 20:14, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hi all! > > Would you please approve the backport of this fix, which augments the > fix for 8049321 by adding a regression test? > With the fix for 8049321, the added test passes on all tested platforms. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146192 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/f9a4a8cbbf49 > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-December/013248.html > > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan > > On 24.12.2015 15:32, Sean Coffey wrote: >> Looks fine Ivan. Approved for jdk8u-dev. >> >> Looks like the JDK 9 bug record needs a noreg- label. >> >> regards, >> Sean. >> >> >> On 24/12/2015 11:49, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: >>> Hello! >>> >>> Would you please approve backporting this enhancement, which turn on >>> support of two signature algorithms in JSSE. >>> The fix did not apply cleanly due to some changes around that code, >>> but modifications are quite straight-forward. >>> I assume the code will need some adjustments, if JDK-8064330 is >>> decided to be ported back to jdk8u. >>> >>> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049321 >>> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8049321/00/webrev/ >>> Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/65f45c833654 >>> Jdk9 review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-December/013215.html >>> >>> >>> Sincerely yours, >>> Ivan >>> >> >> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Jan 25 22:28:55 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (Sean Coffey) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 22:28:55 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <20160125201343.GA3839@redhat.com> References: <20160104164726.GA3700@redhat.com> <568AA36A.6020103@oracle.com> <568AA811.3030707@oracle.com> <56950C4B.8050904@oracle.com> <569511D4.6030708@oracle.com> <56951CAC.40903@oracle.com> <20160125201343.GA3839@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A6A1A7.7030008@oracle.com> On 25/01/2016 20:13, Omair Majid wrote: > Hi, > > * Alex Menkov [2016-01-12 10:33]: >> I don't think this requires CCC - Synthesizer with default sounbank >> generated sounds before and will generate after the fix. >> The sounds will be different (better quality), but there is no behavior >> change. > I am not familiar with how the CCC operates. Should I wait for an > explicit approval from someone before I push this? Or will this not go > up to the CCC? Joe Darcy got back to me offline to state that a CCC was borderline for this change but that it did merit one. I've asked Sergey to follow up. Please hold off any jdk8u-dev push until you hear from Sergey. regards, Sean. > > Thanks, > Omair > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 08:47:39 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:47:39 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A66045.9050200@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> <56A66045.9050200@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A732AB.30103@oracle.com> Hi Vladimir, thanks for the review! On 25.01.2016 18:49, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > RFR for 8u should use original 6675699 bug id and also use it in 8u the changeset comment: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 Right, somehow I got confused because the backport issue was created explicitly. Sorry for that. Here is the correct information (I leave the email subject for history): 6675699: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de > parse2.cpp I noticed that JDK9 change remove -1 from "num_cases-1". Was it intentional? Yes, this is intended because the JDK 9 change uses Compile::conv_I2X_index() which already subtracts 1 from ikeytype->_hi: 4019 if (sizetype != NULL) index_max = sizetype->_hi - 1; JDK 8u change uses C->constrained_convI2L() which does not change the ikeytype->_hi. > graphKit.cpp fast_size_limit is used in jdk9 but not in 8u. Why? Thanks for pointing that out. The JDK 8u fix should use 'fast_size_limit' as upper bound as well because it's more accurate than 'max_array_length'. New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.01/ Best, Tobias > On 1/25/16 1:59 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >> >> 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de >> >> The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ >> >> I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. >> >> Thanks, >> Tobias >> From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 15:41:03 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 16:41:03 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8146274: Thread spinning on WeakHashMap.getEntry() with concurrent use of nashorn Message-ID: <56A7938F.5070204@oracle.com> Please approve backport of 8146274 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146274 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005851.html The change applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. Thanks, Hannes From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 16:16:08 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:16:08 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8146274: Thread spinning on WeakHashMap.getEntry() with concurrent use of nashorn In-Reply-To: <56A7938F.5070204@oracle.com> References: <56A7938F.5070204@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A79BC8.3000608@oracle.com> Approved for 8u-dev. cheers, dalibor topic On 26.01.2016 16:41, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > Please approve backport of 8146274 to 8u-dev. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146274 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev/ > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005851.html > > The change applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. > > Thanks, > Hannes -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 16:21:40 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:21:40 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] request for review and approval to backport JDK-8130304: Inference: NodeNotFoundException thrown with deep generic method call chain In-Reply-To: <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> References: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A79D14.307@oracle.com> Approved for 8u-dev pending positive review. cheers, dalibor topic On 25.01.2016 15:21, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to ask for a code review and an approval to backport the > following fix to 8u-dev: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130304 > jdk9 fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/70c852df047c > > The fix does not apply cleanly to 8u-dev/langtools. A webrev for the > patch updated for 8u-dev is here: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8130304/ > > The changes between the jdk9 and 8u-dev fixes are to adjust some typing > issues in the TarjanNode class (since the hierarchy has slightly > different generic type signatures in JDK 9). > > Thanks > Maurizio -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 17:21:47 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 17:21:47 +0000 Subject: [8u-communication] JDK 8u72 is now available! Message-ID: <56A7AB2B.1070704@oracle.com> JDK 8u72 was released last week [0]. Thanks to all those who have contributed towards it. OpenJDK 8u72 source code is available from the jdk8u master forest via use of the 'jdk8u72-b15' mercurial tag. I plan to update the OpenJDK 8u project page with latest status. If you're packaging this release, it could be useful to let subscribed members know about it via communication on this mailing list. Please continue to contribute fixes back to the jdk8u-dev forest [1] which is already gathering changes for 8u76. Note that 8u76 based early access binaries from Oracle are already available [2] -Rob [0] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev [2] https://jdk8.java.net/download.html From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 18:11:23 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:11:23 -0800 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A732AB.30103@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> <56A66045.9050200@oracle.com> <56A732AB.30103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A7B6CB.8050606@oracle.com> Looks good now. Thanks, Vladimir On 1/26/16 12:47 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: > Hi Vladimir, > > thanks for the review! > > On 25.01.2016 18:49, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> RFR for 8u should use original 6675699 bug id and also use it in 8u the changeset comment: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 > > Right, somehow I got confused because the backport issue was created explicitly. Sorry for that. > > Here is the correct information (I leave the email subject for history): > > 6675699: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de > >> parse2.cpp I noticed that JDK9 change remove -1 from "num_cases-1". Was it intentional? > > Yes, this is intended because the JDK 9 change uses Compile::conv_I2X_index() which already subtracts 1 from ikeytype->_hi: > > 4019 if (sizetype != NULL) index_max = sizetype->_hi - 1; > > JDK 8u change uses C->constrained_convI2L() which does not change the ikeytype->_hi. > >> graphKit.cpp fast_size_limit is used in jdk9 but not in 8u. Why? > > Thanks for pointing that out. The JDK 8u fix should use 'fast_size_limit' as upper bound as well because it's more accurate than 'max_array_length'. > > New webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.01/ > > Best, > Tobias > >> On 1/25/16 1:59 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >>> >>> 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de >>> >>> The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ >>> >>> I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tobias >>> From vicente.romero at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 18:23:34 2016 From: vicente.romero at oracle.com (Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:23:34 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] request for review and approval to backport JDK-8130304: Inference: NodeNotFoundException thrown with deep generic method call chain In-Reply-To: <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> References: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A7B9A6.7080108@oracle.com> Approved, Comment, the patch for 8 has an extra test that is not present in the patch for 9. Is it worthy / applicable to provide the test for 9 in a separate patch? Thanks, Vicente On 01/25/2016 06:21 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > Hello, > > I'd like to ask for a code review and an approval to backport the > following fix to 8u-dev: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130304 > jdk9 fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/70c852df047c > > The fix does not apply cleanly to 8u-dev/langtools. A webrev for the > patch updated for 8u-dev is here: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8130304/ > > The changes between the jdk9 and 8u-dev fixes are to adjust some > typing issues in the TarjanNode class (since the hierarchy has > slightly different generic type signatures in JDK 9). > > Thanks > Maurizio From maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 18:56:06 2016 From: maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com (Maurizio Cimadamore) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 18:56:06 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] request for review and approval to backport JDK-8130304: Inference: NodeNotFoundException thrown with deep generic method call chain In-Reply-To: <56A7B9A6.7080108@oracle.com> References: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> <56A7B9A6.7080108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A7C146.80808@oracle.com> On 26/01/16 18:23, Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar wrote: > Approved, > > Comment, the patch for 8 has an extra test that is not present in the > patch for 9. Is it worthy / applicable to provide the test for 9 in a > separate patch? Yeah - we can push the test in 9. Maurizio > > Thanks, > Vicente > > > On 01/25/2016 06:21 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I'd like to ask for a code review and an approval to backport the >> following fix to 8u-dev: >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130304 >> jdk9 fix: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/70c852df047c >> >> The fix does not apply cleanly to 8u-dev/langtools. A webrev for the >> patch updated for 8u-dev is here: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8130304/ >> >> The changes between the jdk9 and 8u-dev fixes are to adjust some >> typing issues in the TarjanNode class (since the hierarchy has >> slightly different generic type signatures in JDK 9). >> >> Thanks >> Maurizio > From vicente.romero at oracle.com Tue Jan 26 19:10:11 2016 From: vicente.romero at oracle.com (Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:10:11 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] request for review and approval to backport JDK-8130304: Inference: NodeNotFoundException thrown with deep generic method call chain In-Reply-To: <56A7C146.80808@oracle.com> References: <54DD181C.30206@oracle.com> <56A62F6E.4080103@oracle.com> <56A7B9A6.7080108@oracle.com> <56A7C146.80808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A7C493.4000808@oracle.com> On 01/26/2016 10:56 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: > > > On 26/01/16 18:23, Vicente-Arturo Romero-Zaldivar wrote: >> Approved, >> >> Comment, the patch for 8 has an extra test that is not present in the >> patch for 9. Is it worthy / applicable to provide the test for 9 in a >> separate patch? > Yeah - we can push the test in 9. Nice, Thanks, Vicente > > Maurizio >> >> Thanks, >> Vicente >> >> >> On 01/25/2016 06:21 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'd like to ask for a code review and an approval to backport the >>> following fix to 8u-dev: >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130304 >>> jdk9 fix: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/70c852df047c >>> >>> The fix does not apply cleanly to 8u-dev/langtools. A webrev for the >>> patch updated for 8u-dev is here: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcimadamore/8130304/ >>> >>> The changes between the jdk9 and 8u-dev fixes are to adjust some >>> typing issues in the TarjanNode class (since the hierarchy has >>> slightly different generic type signatures in JDK 9). >>> >>> Thanks >>> Maurizio >> > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 07:00:25 2016 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:00:25 +0100 Subject: [8u] Request for approval: Backport of 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type In-Reply-To: <56A7B6CB.8050606@oracle.com> References: <56A5F209.3060704@oracle.com> <56A66045.9050200@oracle.com> <56A732AB.30103@oracle.com> <56A7B6CB.8050606@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A86B09.3000903@oracle.com> Thanks, Vladimir. Best, Tobias On 26.01.2016 19:11, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Looks good now. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > > On 1/26/16 12:47 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >> Hi Vladimir, >> >> thanks for the review! >> >> On 25.01.2016 18:49, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>> RFR for 8u should use original 6675699 bug id and also use it in 8u the changeset comment: >>> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 >> >> Right, somehow I got confused because the backport issue was created explicitly. Sorry for that. >> >> Here is the correct information (I leave the email subject for history): >> >> 6675699: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6675699 >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de >> >>> parse2.cpp I noticed that JDK9 change remove -1 from "num_cases-1". Was it intentional? >> >> Yes, this is intended because the JDK 9 change uses Compile::conv_I2X_index() which already subtracts 1 from ikeytype->_hi: >> >> 4019 if (sizetype != NULL) index_max = sizetype->_hi - 1; >> >> JDK 8u change uses C->constrained_convI2L() which does not change the ikeytype->_hi. >> >>> graphKit.cpp fast_size_limit is used in jdk9 but not in 8u. Why? >> >> Thanks for pointing that out. The JDK 8u fix should use 'fast_size_limit' as upper bound as well because it's more accurate than 'max_array_length'. >> >> New webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.01/ >> >> Best, >> Tobias >> >>> On 1/25/16 1:59 AM, Tobias Hartmann wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> please approve and review the following backport to 8u. >>>> >>>> 8147548: need comprehensive fix for unconstrained ConvI2L with narrowed type >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147548 >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-January/020810.html >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/bfb7a8a004de >>>> >>>> The fix was pushed to hs-comp on January, 18 and nightly testing showed no problems. Unfortunately, the changes do not apply cleanly to 8u-dev because several enhancements that affect related code were not backported to 8. Here is a new webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~thartmann/6675699_8u/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> I did additional performance and correctness testing to verify that the backport works fine and does not introduce a regression. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Tobias >>>> From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 08:14:00 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:14:00 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Erik Helin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A4.3040808@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A87C48.6070400@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanK 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 stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 08:14:39 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:14:39 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Mikael Gerdin In-Reply-To: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1A8.4000601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A87C6F.3060509@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanK 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 stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 08:15:04 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 09:15:04 +0100 Subject: CFV: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Thomas Schatzl In-Reply-To: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> References: <56A0A1AD.70306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A87C88.8050106@oracle.com> Vote: yes StefanK 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 cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 09:39:01 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (cheleswer sahu) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 15:09:01 +0530 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8073735: compiler/loopopts/CountedLoopProblem.java got OOME Message-ID: <56A89035.90507@oracle.com> Hi, May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to JDK8. BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073735 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0a5f2750ef42 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/017184.html Regards, Cheleswer From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 10:25:56 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 10:25:56 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8073735: compiler/loopopts/CountedLoopProblem.java got OOME In-Reply-To: <56A89035.90507@oracle.com> References: <56A89035.90507@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56A89B34.6070907@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 27/01/16 09:39, cheleswer sahu wrote: > Hi, > > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. > JDK9 fix applies cleanly to JDK8. > > BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073735 > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0a5f2750ef42 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2015-February/017184.html > > > Regards, > Cheleswer > From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 11:29:09 2016 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 03:29:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for Backport of CR JDK-8141243: Unexpected timezone returned after parsing a date Message-ID: Hi, Please approve the backport of 8141243 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8141243 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/a1aa2671f281 Since there were few minor changes in ResourceBundleGenerator this backport code review was done in a separate thread. JDK8 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/i18n-dev/2016-January/001833.html JDK8 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8141243/webrev.01/ Regards, Ramanand. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Jan 27 12:43:15 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 12:43:15 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for Backport of CR JDK-8141243: Unexpected timezone returned after parsing a date In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56A8BB63.4010701@oracle.com> Approved -Rob On 27/01/16 11:29, Ramanand Patil wrote: > Hi, > > > Please approve the backport of 8141243 to 8u-dev. > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8141243 > > > > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/a1aa2671f281 > > > > Since there were few minor changes in ResourceBundleGenerator this backport code review was done in a separate thread. > > JDK8 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/i18n-dev/2016-January/001833.html > > > JDK8 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8141243/webrev.01/ > > > > > Regards, > Ramanand. > From omajid at redhat.com Wed Jan 27 21:59:44 2016 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 16:59:44 -0500 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 6961123 - setWMClass fails to null-terminate WM_CLASS string Message-ID: <20160127215944.GG3789@redhat.com> Hi, Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6961123 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/6961123-missing-null-wmclass-jdk8u/00/ JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/82e20d566ab5 The jdk9 change is identical to the jdk8 change aside from the different paths. Original patch review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-December/010496.html Thanks, Omair -- PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681 From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 28 08:04:32 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 08:04:32 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR 6961123 - setWMClass fails to null-terminate WM_CLASS string In-Reply-To: <20160127215944.GG3789@redhat.com> References: <20160127215944.GG3789@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56A9CB90.6010500@oracle.com> Approved. Please add a suitable noreg label to the JDK 9 bug report : http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Regards, Sean. On 27/01/2016 21:59, Omair Majid wrote: > Hi, > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6961123 > > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~omajid/webrevs/6961123-missing-null-wmclass-jdk8u/00/ > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/82e20d566ab5 > > The jdk9 change is identical to the jdk8 change aside from the different > paths. > > Original patch review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-December/010496.html > > Thanks, > Omair > From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Thu Jan 28 12:40:02 2016 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (Hannes Wallnoefer) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:40:02 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8146274: Thread spinning on WeakHashMap.getEntry() with concurrent use of nashorn In-Reply-To: <56A79BC8.3000608@oracle.com> References: <56A7938F.5070204@oracle.com> <56A79BC8.3000608@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AA0C22.7070408@oracle.com> My backport request was a bit premature, the backport required some (minor) change after all. Please approve: Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005901.html 8u Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev-8u/ Thanks, Hannes Am 2016-01-26 um 17:16 schrieb dalibor topic: > Approved for 8u-dev. > > cheers, > dalibor topic > > On 26.01.2016 16:41, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >> Please approve backport of 8146274 to 8u-dev. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146274 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev/ >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005851.html >> >> >> The change applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. >> >> Thanks, >> Hannes > From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jan 28 12:48:06 2016 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:48:06 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8146274: Thread spinning on WeakHashMap.getEntry() with concurrent use of nashorn In-Reply-To: <56AA0C22.7070408@oracle.com> References: <56A7938F.5070204@oracle.com> <56A79BC8.3000608@oracle.com> <56AA0C22.7070408@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AA0E06.80109@oracle.com> Thanks, Hannes - good catch. Approved for 8u-dev. cheers, dalibor topic On 28.01.2016 13:40, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: > My backport request was a bit premature, the backport required some > (minor) change after all. Please approve: > > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005901.html > 8u Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev-8u/ > > Thanks, > Hannes > > Am 2016-01-26 um 17:16 schrieb dalibor topic: >> Approved for 8u-dev. >> >> cheers, >> dalibor topic >> >> On 26.01.2016 16:41, Hannes Wallnoefer wrote: >>> Please approve backport of 8146274 to 8u-dev. >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146274 >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8146274/webrev/ >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nashorn-dev/2016-January/005851.html >>> >>> >>> The change applies cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Hannes >> > -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 28 15:21:36 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:21:36 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u60-dev forests Message-ID: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> 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. This is the old hotspot team integration forest that was used in the earlier days of the JDK 8 Updates Project. It's no longer used and all its changes are in the JDK 8u master forest (jdk8u). If I hear no objections before COB Monday 1st February, I'll ask ops team to delete the forest. -- Regards, Sean. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Jan 28 15:23:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 15:23:39 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u/hs-dev forest In-Reply-To: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AA327B.4090901@oracle.com> Resending with correct Subject title.. Regards, Sean. On 28/01/2016 15:21, 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. > > This is the old hotspot team integration forest that was used in the > earlier days of the JDK 8 Updates Project. It's no longer used and all > its changes are in the JDK 8u master forest (jdk8u). > > If I hear no objections before COB Monday 1st February, I'll ask ops > team to delete the forest. > From aph at redhat.com Thu Jan 28 16:10:21 2016 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:10:21 +0000 Subject: [8u communication] - Removal of jdk8u60-hs and jdk8u60-dev forests In-Reply-To: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> References: <56AA3200.3060205@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AA3D6D.6060702@redhat.com> 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. Andrew. From stefan.karlsson at oracle.com Fri Jan 29 09:05:56 2016 From: stefan.karlsson at oracle.com (Stefan Karlsson) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 10:05:56 +0100 Subject: Result: New JDK 8 Updates Reviewer: Stefan Johansson Message-ID: <56AB2B74.2020607@oracle.com> 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 Fri Jan 29 13:27:19 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:27:19 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector Message-ID: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> 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 Fri Jan 29 13:51:46 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 13:51:46 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 6425769: Allow specifying an address to bind JMX remote connector In-Reply-To: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> References: <1454074039.11411.17.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <56AB6E72.5080505@oracle.com> Severin, this will require a CCC review for jdk8u-dev. It introduces a new system property. I'm cc'ing Jaroslav. Jaroslav, would you be willing to log a JDK 8u CCC record for this port ? 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 alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Fri Jan 29 13:51:53 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 16:51:53 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8036006: [TESTBUG] sun/tools/native2ascii/NativeErrors.java fails: Process exit code was 0, but error was expected In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AB6E79.6040100@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8036006 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036006) The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c5a2fc3ec942 Thanks, Alexander From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Jan 29 14:35:37 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:35:37 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8036006: [TESTBUG] sun/tools/native2ascii/NativeErrors.java fails: Process exit code was 0, but error was expected In-Reply-To: <56AB6E79.6040100@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56AB6E79.6040100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AB78B9.3040702@oracle.com> Hi Alexander, Please follow the approval request template for future requests: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html Approved -Rob On 29/01/16 13:51, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8036006 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036006) > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c5a2fc3ec942 > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Jan 29 14:48:07 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 14:48:07 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8036006: [TESTBUG] sun/tools/native2ascii/NativeErrors.java fails: Process exit code was 0, but error was expected In-Reply-To: <56AB78B9.3040702@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56AB6E79.6040100@oracle.com> <56AB78B9.3040702@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56AB7BA7.70906@oracle.com> Link to the review thread for posterity: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-June/014959.html -Rob On 29/01/16 14:35, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi Alexander, > > Please follow the approval request template for future requests: > > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/approval-template.html > > Approved > > -Rob > > > On 29/01/16 13:51, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8036006 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036006) >> The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >> >> JDK 9 Changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c5a2fc3ec942 >> >> Thanks, >> Alexander >> >> >> From poonam.bajaj at oracle.com Fri Jan 29 19:48:03 2016 From: poonam.bajaj at oracle.com (Poonam Bajaj Parhar) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:48:03 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8145442: Add the facility to verify remembered sets for G1 Message-ID: <56ABC1F3.8080108@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve this backport for 8u-dev: Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8145442/webrev.8u/ JDK8 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/016336.html jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/3666a5638df2 Thanks, Poonam From sean.coffey at oracle.com Sat Jan 30 13:56:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (Sean Coffey) Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 13:56:39 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8145442: Add the facility to verify remembered sets for G1 In-Reply-To: <56ABC1F3.8080108@oracle.com> References: <56ABC1F3.8080108@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56ACC117.8040503@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 29/01/2016 19:48, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve this backport for 8u-dev: > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8145442/webrev.8u/ > JDK8 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-January/016336.html > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/3666a5638df2 > > Thanks, > Poonam >