From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 00:25:00 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 00:25:00 +0000 Subject: [8u] backport of 8148353: [linux-sparc] Crash in libawt.so on Linux SPARC In-Reply-To: <56D4D5BC.30503@oracle.com> References: <826FAB32-8FC1-4FDA-AE0E-0F3D083D8AFA@oracle.com> <56D4D5BC.30503@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160301002500.GA4515@vimes> Approved -Rob On 29/02/16 03:35, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Looks good. > > Note, the code fix was applied cleanly to jdk 8u. Only test have to be > modified. > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 2/29/16 12:52 PM, Roland Westrelin wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Please approve and review the following backport to 8u. > > > >8148353 was pushed to jdk9 last week (on Wednesday) and it hasn?t caused any new failures during nightly testing. The change doesn?t apply cleanly to 8u: I had to rework the test because the infrastructure to run native jtreg tests doesn?t seem to exist in 8. I restricted the test to linux-sparc to keep it simple. > > > >https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148353 > >http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-comp/hotspot/rev/1f4f4866aee0 > > > >New webrev: > >http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8148353/webrev.8u.00/ > > > >review thread: > >http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/thread.html#21530 > > > >Note that when I pushed 8148353 to 9, the fix version was set to 8 and so a backport was created for 9. > > > >Roland. > > From cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 06:49:32 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (Cheleswer Sahu) Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 22:49:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8139040 : Fix initializations before ShouldNotReachHere() etc. and enable -Wuninitialized on linux. Message-ID: Hi, May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8 in JPRT, it shows no error. Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139040 JDK8 review link: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018012.html JDK8 webev: HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ecsahu/8139040/"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8139040/ Regards, Cheleswer From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 07:09:56 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:09:56 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8139040 : Fix initializations before ShouldNotReachHere() etc. and enable -Wuninitialized on linux. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev Here is the ?conclusion? of the review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-March/018220.html Cheers, -Buck > On Mar 1, 2016, at 15:49, Cheleswer Sahu wrote: > > Hi, > > > > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8 in JPRT, it shows no error. > > > > Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139040 > > JDK8 review link: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018012.html > > JDK8 webev: HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ecsahu/8139040/"http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8139040/ > > > > > > Regards, > > Cheleswer From roland.westrelin at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 11:25:53 2016 From: roland.westrelin at oracle.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 12:25:53 +0100 Subject: [8u] backport of 8148353: [linux-sparc] Crash in libawt.so on Linux SPARC In-Reply-To: <20160301002500.GA4515@vimes> References: <826FAB32-8FC1-4FDA-AE0E-0F3D083D8AFA@oracle.com> <56D4D5BC.30503@oracle.com> <20160301002500.GA4515@vimes> Message-ID: <8DC85D52-4C2C-4280-A01D-7F323AB4B7E1@oracle.com> Thanks Rob & Vladimir. Roland. From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 13:05:09 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 14:05:09 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8149743: JVM crash after debugger hotswap with lambdas Message-ID: <56D59385.5040400@oracle.com> Hi, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8149743: JVM crash after debugger hotswap with lambdas The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. JDK 9 Changesets: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/8750312a7452 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/6e19808c749b JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018069.html Regards, Andreas From daniel.fuchs at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 14:22:39 2016 From: daniel.fuchs at oracle.com (Daniel Fuchs) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:22:39 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out intermittently. Message-ID: <56D5A5AF.5000701@oracle.com> Hi, This is a request for approval to backport the fix for 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out intermittently. This is a clean import (test only) of the JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/41e3c10db27a Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039098.html The fix itself is trivial. best regards, -- daniel From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 15:44:20 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:44:20 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8149743: JVM crash after debugger hotswap with lambdas In-Reply-To: <56D59385.5040400@oracle.com> References: <56D59385.5040400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160301154420.GB2588@vimes> Please add an appropriate noreg label and include a link to the bug in future requests. Approved. -Rob On 01/03/16 02:05, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8149743: JVM crash after debugger > hotswap with lambdas > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > JDK 9 Changesets: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/8750312a7452 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/6e19808c749b > > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018069.html > > Regards, > Andreas From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 15:45:39 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 15:45:39 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out intermittently. In-Reply-To: <56D5A5AF.5000701@oracle.com> References: <56D5A5AF.5000701@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160301154539.GC2588@vimes> Please include a link to the bug in future requests. Approved. -Rob On 01/03/16 03:22, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi, > > This is a request for approval to backport the fix for > 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out > intermittently. > > This is a clean import (test only) of the JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/41e3c10db27a > > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039098.html > > The fix itself is trivial. > > best regards, > > -- daniel From daniel.fuchs at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 15:48:37 2016 From: daniel.fuchs at oracle.com (Daniel Fuchs) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:48:37 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out intermittently. In-Reply-To: <20160301154539.GC2588@vimes> References: <56D5A5AF.5000701@oracle.com> <20160301154539.GC2588@vimes> Message-ID: <56D5B9D5.10802@oracle.com> Thanks Rob. For the record here is the link: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150533 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out intermittently. On 01/03/16 16:45, Rob McKenna wrote: > Please include a link to the bug in future requests. > > Approved. > > -Rob > > On 01/03/16 03:22, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This is a request for approval to backport the fix for >> 8150533: Test java/util/logging/LogManagerAppContextDeadlock.java times out >> intermittently. >> >> This is a clean import (test only) of the JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/41e3c10db27a >> >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039098.html >> >> The fix itself is trivial. >> >> best regards, >> >> -- daniel From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 16:11:10 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 17:11:10 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8149743: JVM crash after debugger hotswap with lambdas In-Reply-To: <20160301154420.GB2588@vimes> References: <56D59385.5040400@oracle.com> <20160301154420.GB2588@vimes> Message-ID: <56D5BF1E.7070006@oracle.com> On 2016-03-01 16:44, Rob McKenna wrote: > Please add an appropriate noreg label and include a link to the bug in future requests. There is a test included (the jdk changeset), so a noreg label shouldn't be needed. - Andreas > Approved. > > -Rob > > On 01/03/16 02:05, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8149743: JVM crash after debugger >> hotswap with lambdas >> The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >> >> JDK 9 Changesets: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/8750312a7452 >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/6e19808c749b >> >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018069.html >> >> Regards, >> Andreas From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 1 16:56:45 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 16:56:45 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8149743: JVM crash after debugger hotswap with lambdas In-Reply-To: <56D5BF1E.7070006@oracle.com> References: <56D59385.5040400@oracle.com> <20160301154420.GB2588@vimes> <56D5BF1E.7070006@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160301165645.GF2588@vimes> Ah, correct. Thanks, -Rob On 01/03/16 05:11, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > > > On 2016-03-01 16:44, Rob McKenna wrote: > >Please add an appropriate noreg label and include a link to the bug in future requests. > > There is a test included (the jdk changeset), so a noreg label shouldn't be > needed. > > - Andreas > > >Approved. > > > > -Rob > > > >On 01/03/16 02:05, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8149743: JVM crash after debugger > >>hotswap with lambdas > >>The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > >> > >>JDK 9 Changesets: > >>http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/hotspot/rev/8750312a7452 > >>http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/6e19808c749b > >> > >>JDK 9 review thread: > >>http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018069.html > >> > >>Regards, > >>Andreas > From cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 06:50:03 2016 From: cheleswer.sahu at oracle.com (Cheleswer Sahu) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 22:50:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: RFA[8u-dev]: 8130425: libjvm crash due to stack overflow in executables with 32k tbss/tdata Message-ID: Hi, May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8u. I have built and tested JDK8u already. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to the JDK8u. Only difference in backport is the file name. In JDK9 changes were In "src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ProcessHandleImpl.java" where as in JDK8u this change has been done in "src/solaris/classes/java/lang/UNIXProcess.java". BUG URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130425 JDK9 change set: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/460323d4a285 JDK9 review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018031.html JDK8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8130425/ Regards, Cheleswer From boris.molodenkov at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 12:02:35 2016 From: boris.molodenkov at oracle.com (Boris Molodenkov) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 15:02:35 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8055844 Message-ID: <56D6D65B.8020803@oracle.com> Hi All, I would like to backport JDK-8055844 to 8u-dev. The changeset from JDK9 applies cleanly. Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055844 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/026e9d17ba9b Review thread for original fix: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2014-August/012387.html Thanks, Boris From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 12:12:01 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 21:12:01 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8055844 In-Reply-To: <56D6D65B.8020803@oracle.com> References: <56D6D65B.8020803@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8BFDAD52-2BC3-43AE-A302-381C47A7F8D9@oracle.com> approved for backport to jdk8u-dev Please add the appropriate noreg label to the bug report before pushing [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Cheers, -Buck > On Mar 2, 2016, at 21:02, Boris Molodenkov wrote: > > Hi All, > > I would like to backport JDK-8055844 to 8u-dev. > The changeset from JDK9 applies cleanly. > > Bug id: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055844 > Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/026e9d17ba9b > Review thread for original fix: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2014-August/012387.html > > Thanks, > Boris > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 12:13:03 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:13:03 +0000 Subject: RFA[8u-dev]: 8130425: libjvm crash due to stack overflow in executables with 32k tbss/tdata In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56D6D8CF.3020204@oracle.com> Looks fine. Approved. I'm surprised that a simple testcase wasn't written to exercise the new property. (even if it was as simple as passing in a negative value and expecting an exception etc.) Granted - it is platform dependent. Regards, Sean. On 02/03/16 06:50, Cheleswer Sahu wrote: > Hi, > > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8u. I have built and tested JDK8u already. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to the JDK8u. > Only difference in backport is the file name. In JDK9 changes were In "src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ProcessHandleImpl.java" where as in JDK8u this change has been done in "src/solaris/classes/java/lang/UNIXProcess.java". > > BUG URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130425 > JDK9 change set: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/460323d4a285 > JDK9 review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-February/018031.html > JDK8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~csahu/8130425/ > > Regards, > Cheleswer From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Wed Mar 2 16:19:17 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:19:17 -0500 (EST) Subject: Taking screenshots on x11 composite desktop produce wrong result In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1379848807.3811958.1456935557771.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > Hi all, > > I have a fix for the issue detailed in the following bug report: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150954 > > The issue is does not affect JDK9 so I guess my primary target for the > bug is jdk8u-dev and the backports will go into 7 and 6 as needed. > > The fix basically checks the _NET_WM_CM_Sn atom (where n is the screen > number), since the composite manager *MUST* acquire ownership of this > selection, if there's a selection we're running a compositor and at > this point, wecan get the window root where the actual compositing > takes places and get a screenshot of that. > > JDK9 is not affected since the implementation seems to have moved to > GTK, I see there's some code referring to the old path, but it's > unlikely to be used in composited desktop anyway, I didn't stress test > it though. > > The bug report contains images describing various configurations, and > a simple test case. > > The proposed fix webrevs can be found here: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/8150954/ > > I tried the fix on RHEL 7.2 locally and over a remote x11 connection > with and without a composite desktop. > > There are two parts, one pertaining the configure machinery (to > include the necessary XRender/XComposite stuff) and the other is the > actual awt Robot fix. > > If accepted, the configure should be regenerated, the patch contains > this as well, but I'm not sure how to deal with the closed bits, so > some guidance is welcomed. > > Any comments? > > Cheers, > Mario > The patch looks good to me. I've CCed 8u as the patch applies there, rather than for 9. 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 ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 17:29:18 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 20:29:18 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for REVIEW and APPROVAL to backport: 8149330: Capacity of StringBuilder should not get close to Integer.MAX_VALUE unless necessary Message-ID: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> Hello! I'm seeking for approval to backport this fix into jdk8u-dev. Comparing to Jdk9, the patch had to be changed mainly due to compact string support introduced in jdk9. However, the fix is essentially the same: we just avoid getting too close to Integer.MAX_VALUE when doing reallocations unless explicitly required. Would you please help review it? Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149330 Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/123593aacb48 Jdk9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039018.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039182.html Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8149330/04/webrev/ Sincerely yours, Ivan From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 17:30:58 2016 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 09:30:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8066871: java.lang.VerifyError: Bad local variable type - local final String Message-ID: <77de47ca-a149-40e2-aa08-001287f15e7d@default> Hi, Please approve the backport of HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066871"JDK-8066871 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066871 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/langtools/rev/6a927a9114c1 Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. Regards, Ramanand. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 17:46:23 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 17:46:23 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 8066871: java.lang.VerifyError: Bad local variable type - local final String In-Reply-To: <77de47ca-a149-40e2-aa08-001287f15e7d@default> References: <77de47ca-a149-40e2-aa08-001287f15e7d@default> Message-ID: <20160302174623.GD17264@vimes> Approved -Rob On 02/03/16 09:30, Ramanand Patil wrote: > Hi, > Please approve the backport of HYPERLINK "https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066871"JDK-8066871 to 8u-dev. > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8066871 > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/langtools/rev/6a927a9114c1 > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. > > Regards, > > Ramanand. > > > > From Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 18:59:34 2016 From: Sergey.Bylokhov at oracle.com (Sergey Bylokhov) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 21:59:34 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8147994 [macosx] JScrollPane jitters up/down during trackpad scrolling on MacOS/Aqua Message-ID: <56D73816.3060106@oracle.com> Hello, These is a direct back port from jdk 9 to jdk 8u-dev. 8147994 [macosx] JScrollPane jitters up/down during trackpad scrolling on MacOS/Aqua Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147994 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8147994/webrev.02 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/0c9bc87633bc Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-February/005402.html Reviewers: Alexey Ivanov, Alexander Potochkin -- Best regards, Sergey. From daniel.fuchs at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 19:31:31 2016 From: daniel.fuchs at oracle.com (Daniel Fuchs) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 20:31:31 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8148820: Missing @since Javadoc tag in Logger.log(Level, Supplier) Message-ID: <56D73F93.2010407@oracle.com> Hi, This is a request for approval to backport 8148820 to jdk8u-dev: 8148820: Missing @since Javadoc tag in Logger.log(Level, Supplier) https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148820 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/f8dc643587de jdk9 Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039171.html The patch applies cleanly after unshuffle. best regards, -- daniel From martinrb at google.com Wed Mar 2 20:20:04 2016 From: martinrb at google.com (Martin Buchholz) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 12:20:04 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for REVIEW and APPROVAL to backport: 8149330: Capacity of StringBuilder should not get close to Integer.MAX_VALUE unless necessary In-Reply-To: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> References: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> Message-ID: Reviewed! On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > Hello! > > I'm seeking for approval to backport this fix into jdk8u-dev. > Comparing to Jdk9, the patch had to be changed mainly due to compact string > support introduced in jdk9. > However, the fix is essentially the same: we just avoid getting too close to > Integer.MAX_VALUE when doing reallocations unless explicitly required. > > Would you please help review it? > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149330 > Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/123593aacb48 > Jdk9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039018.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039182.html > Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8149330/04/webrev/ > > Sincerely yours, > Ivan From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 2 21:09:03 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 21:09:03 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8147994 [macosx] JScrollPane jitters up/down during trackpad scrolling on MacOS/Aqua In-Reply-To: <56D73816.3060106@oracle.com> References: <56D73816.3060106@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160302210903.GF17264@vimes> Approved -Rob On 02/03/16 09:59, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: > Hello, > These is a direct back port from jdk 9 to jdk 8u-dev. > > 8147994 [macosx] JScrollPane jitters up/down during trackpad scrolling on > MacOS/Aqua > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147994 > Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8147994/webrev.02 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/0c9bc87633bc > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-February/005402.html > Reviewers: Alexey Ivanov, Alexander Potochkin > > > -- > Best regards, Sergey. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 01:56:33 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 01:56:33 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8148820: Missing @since Javadoc tag in Logger.log(Level, Supplier) In-Reply-To: <56D73F93.2010407@oracle.com> References: <56D73F93.2010407@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160303015633.GB2582@vimes> Approved -Rob On 02/03/16 08:31, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Hi, > > This is a request for approval to backport 8148820 to jdk8u-dev: > > 8148820: Missing @since Javadoc tag in Logger.log(Level, Supplier) > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8148820 > > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/f8dc643587de > > jdk9 Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039171.html > > The patch applies cleanly after unshuffle. > > best regards, > > -- daniel From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 09:04:47 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:04:47 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for REVIEW and APPROVAL to backport: 8149330: Capacity of StringBuilder should not get close to Integer.MAX_VALUE unless necessary In-Reply-To: References: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D7FE2F.8030207@oracle.com> Ivan, the JBS bug description is scare on detail. Can you fill it out a bit ? Some examples of the stack trace encountered and links to OpenJDK reviews/discussions will help people who encounter this issue in the future. Regards, Sean. On 02/03/2016 20:20, Martin Buchholz wrote: > Reviewed! > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Ivan Gerasimov > wrote: >> Hello! >> >> I'm seeking for approval to backport this fix into jdk8u-dev. >> Comparing to Jdk9, the patch had to be changed mainly due to compact string >> support introduced in jdk9. >> However, the fix is essentially the same: we just avoid getting too close to >> Integer.MAX_VALUE when doing reallocations unless explicitly required. >> >> Would you please help review it? >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149330 >> Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/123593aacb48 >> Jdk9 review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039018.html >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039182.html >> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8149330/04/webrev/ >> >> Sincerely yours, >> Ivan From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 09:07:20 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:07:20 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for REVIEW and APPROVAL to backport: 8149330: Capacity of StringBuilder should not get close to Integer.MAX_VALUE unless necessary In-Reply-To: <56D7FE2F.8030207@oracle.com> References: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> <56D7FE2F.8030207@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D7FEC8.3020300@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev (BTW). Regards, Sean. On 03/03/2016 09:04, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Ivan, > > the JBS bug description is scare on detail. Can you fill it out a bit ? > > Some examples of the stack trace encountered and links to OpenJDK > reviews/discussions will help people who encounter this issue in the > future. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 02/03/2016 20:20, Martin Buchholz wrote: >> Reviewed! >> >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Ivan Gerasimov >> wrote: >>> Hello! >>> >>> I'm seeking for approval to backport this fix into jdk8u-dev. >>> Comparing to Jdk9, the patch had to be changed mainly due to compact >>> string >>> support introduced in jdk9. >>> However, the fix is essentially the same: we just avoid getting too >>> close to >>> Integer.MAX_VALUE when doing reallocations unless explicitly required. >>> >>> Would you please help review it? >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149330 >>> Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/123593aacb48 >>> Jdk9 review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039018.html >>> >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039182.html >>> >>> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8149330/04/webrev/ >>> >>> Sincerely yours, >>> Ivan > From ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 12:21:48 2016 From: ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com (Ivan Gerasimov) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 15:21:48 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for REVIEW and APPROVAL to backport: 8149330: Capacity of StringBuilder should not get close to Integer.MAX_VALUE unless necessary In-Reply-To: <56D7FEC8.3020300@oracle.com> References: <56D722EE.2070204@oracle.com> <56D7FE2F.8030207@oracle.com> <56D7FEC8.3020300@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D82C5C.1060208@oracle.com> Thank you Martin and Se?n! I'll add some info to the bug report with a reproducer code and symptoms. Sincerely yours, Ivan On 03.03.2016 12:07, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Approved for jdk8u-dev (BTW). > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 03/03/2016 09:04, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Ivan, >> >> the JBS bug description is scare on detail. Can you fill it out a bit ? >> >> Some examples of the stack trace encountered and links to OpenJDK >> reviews/discussions will help people who encounter this issue in the >> future. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 02/03/2016 20:20, Martin Buchholz wrote: >>> Reviewed! >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Ivan Gerasimov >>> wrote: >>>> Hello! >>>> >>>> I'm seeking for approval to backport this fix into jdk8u-dev. >>>> Comparing to Jdk9, the patch had to be changed mainly due to >>>> compact string >>>> support introduced in jdk9. >>>> However, the fix is essentially the same: we just avoid getting too >>>> close to >>>> Integer.MAX_VALUE when doing reallocations unless explicitly required. >>>> >>>> Would you please help review it? >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8149330 >>>> Jdk9 change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/123593aacb48 >>>> Jdk9 review: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039018.html >>>> >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039182.html >>>> >>>> Jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8149330/04/webrev/ >>>> >>>> Sincerely yours, >>>> Ivan >> > > From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 12:41:25 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 15:41:25 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> Little reminder. On 29.02.2016 18:05, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Sean, > thank you! > > Xue-Lei, > if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were > already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ > > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >>> combined with there fixes. >>> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >>> >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>> >>> >>> Please find detailed info below: >>> >>> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >>> >>> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >>> + fix for that test: >>> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >>> updated for JDK-8061210" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >>> >>> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >>> >>> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >>> >>> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >>> TLS/SSL combinations." >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >>> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >>> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >>> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >>> >>> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >>> >>> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >>> >>> JDK 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Svetlana >> > From xuelei.fan at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 12:55:43 2016 From: xuelei.fan at oracle.com (Xuelei Fan) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 20:55:43 +0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> Looks fine to me. Please pass JPRT before pushing. On 3/3/2016 8:41 PM, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Little reminder. > Thanks! Xuelei > On 29.02.2016 18:05, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Sean, >> thank you! >> >> Xue-Lei, >> if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were >> already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. >> Webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >> >> >> Thank you, >> Svetlana >> >> On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >>>> combined with there fixes. >>>> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >>>> >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Please find detailed info below: >>>> >>>> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >>>> >>>> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >>>> + fix for that test: >>>> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >>>> updated for JDK-8061210" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >>>> >>>> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >>>> >>>> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >>>> >>>> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >>>> TLS/SSL combinations." >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >>>> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >>>> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >>>> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >>>> >>>> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >>>> >>>> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >>>> >>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Svetlana >>> >> > From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 13:53:28 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 16:53:28 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D841D8.9060104@oracle.com> Xuelei, thank you! Sure I'll check with JPRT one more time before pushing. Thank you, Svetlana On 03.03.2016 15:55, Xuelei Fan wrote: > Looks fine to me. Please pass JPRT before pushing. > > On 3/3/2016 8:41 PM, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Little reminder. >> > Thanks! > > Xuelei > >> On 29.02.2016 18:05, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>> Sean, >>> thank you! >>> >>> Xue-Lei, >>> if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were >>> already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Svetlana >>> >>> On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Sean. >>>> >>>> On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >>>>> combined with there fixes. >>>>> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >>>>> >>>>> Webrev: >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please find detailed info below: >>>>> >>>>> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >>>>> >>>>> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >>>>> + fix for that test: >>>>> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >>>>> updated for JDK-8061210" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >>>>> >>>>> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >>>>> >>>>> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >>>>> >>>>> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >>>>> TLS/SSL combinations." >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >>>>> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >>>>> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >>>>> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >>>>> >>>>> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >>>>> >>>>> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Svetlana From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 17:03:15 2016 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 09:03:15 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56D49E03.8070407@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> <56D49E03.8070407@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D86E53.4010504@oracle.com> Sean, do you have other concerns? Thanks, Vladimir On 2/29/16 11:37 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > I filed: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150878 > > Vladimir > > On 2/26/16 8:04 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >> Hello Sean >> >> I have filled such bug yet because I haven't pushed the changeset yet, >> so the "bug" isn't present at the moment in any of java repos. >> >> Vladimir. >> >> On 26.02.2016 18:31, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, >>> >>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>> >>> can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to >>> JDK-8130150 >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>>> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue >>>> with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and >>>> 7u. As result next changes where made: >>>> >>>> + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 >>>> + //on jdk7 and jdk8. >>>> +#ifndef SOLARIS >>>> if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { >>>> +#else >>>> + if (0) { >>>> +#endif >>>> ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); >>>> >>>> Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some >>>> range of values. >>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Vladimir >>>> >>>> On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>>>> Hello >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >>>>> >>>>> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >>>>> >>>>> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >>>>> >>>>> Testing: jprt, testcase. >>>>> >>>>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >>>>> Webrev for >>>>> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >>>>> Webrev for jdk: >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Vladimir >>>>> >>> >> From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 17:40:29 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 20:40:29 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D8770D.6000902@oracle.com> Xuelei, Sean, one of my teammates pointed out that it may be unclear that this patch contains only part of "8061210: Issues in TLS" (to be exact only test's fix) and suggested to create a separate test-bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151197 While this is unchanged test fix from jdk 9 and you already approved/reviewed it as a part of the whole patch may I consider this test fix also approved/reviewed? Here is the code change I'm talking about: diff -r d384337ea835 test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java --- a/test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java Mon Jun 29 15:04:43 2015 +0800 +++ b/test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java Thu Mar 03 20:00:05 2016 +0300 @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ /** - * Copyright (c) 2010, 2014, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. + * Copyright (c) 2010, 2016, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. * DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER. * * This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under @@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ private static final String LOCAL_IP = "127.0.0.1"; public static void main(String... args) throws Exception { + // reset the security property to make sure that the algorithms + // and keys used in this test are not disabled. + Security.setProperty("jdk.tls.disabledAlgorithms", ""); + String serverProtocol = System.getProperty("SERVER_PROTOCOL"); String clientProtocol = System.getProperty("CLIENT_PROTOCOL"); int port = jdk.testlibrary.Utils.getFreePort(); Thank you, Svetlana On 03.03.2016 15:55, Xuelei Fan wrote: > Looks fine to me. Please pass JPRT before pushing. > > On 3/3/2016 8:41 PM, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Little reminder. >> > Thanks! > > Xuelei > >> On 29.02.2016 18:05, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>> Sean, >>> thank you! >>> >>> Xue-Lei, >>> if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were >>> already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. >>> Webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Svetlana >>> >>> On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Sean. >>>> >>>> On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >>>>> combined with there fixes. >>>>> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >>>>> >>>>> Webrev: >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Please find detailed info below: >>>>> >>>>> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >>>>> >>>>> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >>>>> + fix for that test: >>>>> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >>>>> updated for JDK-8061210" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >>>>> >>>>> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >>>>> >>>>> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >>>>> >>>>> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >>>>> TLS/SSL combinations." >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >>>>> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >>>>> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >>>>> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >>>>> >>>>> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >>>>> >>>>> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >>>>> Review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >>>>> >>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Svetlana From daniel.daugherty at oracle.com Thu Mar 3 18:44:57 2016 From: daniel.daugherty at oracle.com (Daniel D. Daugherty) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 11:44:57 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8129419 - heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56C72DC1.2050304@oracle.com> References: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> <56C729B2.6050706@oracle.com> <56C72DC1.2050304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D88629.1060608@oracle.com> > Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ > hotspot src/os/solaris/vm/os_solaris.cpp No comments. src/share/vm/services/heapDumper.cpp No comments. > jdk src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/hat/internal/parser/HprofReader.java No comments. Also compared the JDK9 version of the hotspot fix with the JDK8u version of the hotspot fix and I concur with the need for the differences. The HprofReader.java are identical (compared the versions from the two different repos). Thumbs up! Dan On 2/19/16 7:59 AM, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > OK, thanks. > > - Andreas > > On 2016-02-19 15:41, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Andreas, >> >> Given that the code has changed for the backport, I'd suggest you >> seek a JDK 8u Reviewer to check this in addition to Dmitry. I'll >> check if the process can be enhanced for such scenarios. >> >> Approved for jdk8u-dev but pending review. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 18/02/16 16:41, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: >>> assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129419 >>> Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ >>> Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-February/018862.html >>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Samersoff (dsamersoff) >>> >>> If I've understood it correctly, a review by Dmitry is enough since >>> he reviewed the JDK 9 version, even though he is not an 8u reviewer? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Andreas >> > > From Xuelei.Fan at Oracle.COM Fri Mar 4 05:50:13 2016 From: Xuelei.Fan at Oracle.COM (Xuelei Fan) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 13:50:13 +0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements In-Reply-To: <56D8770D.6000902@oracle.com> References: <56CEF56B.4080004@oracle.com> <56CEF852.1000703@oracle.com> <56D45E51.7010106@oracle.com> <56D830F5.9030502@oracle.com> <56D8344F.50902@oracle.com> <56D8770D.6000902@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D92215.8050007@Oracle.COM> It's OK. Xuelei On 3/4/2016 1:40 AM, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Xuelei, Sean, > > one of my teammates pointed out that it may be unclear that this patch > contains only part of > "8061210: Issues in TLS" (to be exact only test's fix) and suggested to > create a separate test-bug: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151197 > > While this is unchanged test fix from jdk 9 and you already > approved/reviewed it as a part of the whole patch may I consider this > test fix also approved/reviewed? > > Here is the code change I'm talking about: > > diff -r d384337ea835 test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java > --- a/test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java Mon Jun 29 15:04:43 2015 > +0800 > +++ b/test/javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java Thu Mar 03 20:00:05 2016 > +0300 > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ > /** > - * Copyright (c) 2010, 2014, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights > reserved. > + * Copyright (c) 2010, 2016, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights > reserved. > * DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER. > * > * This code is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > it under > @@ -78,6 +78,10 @@ > private static final String LOCAL_IP = "127.0.0.1"; > > public static void main(String... args) throws Exception { > + // reset the security property to make sure that the algorithms > + // and keys used in this test are not disabled. > + Security.setProperty("jdk.tls.disabledAlgorithms", ""); > + > String serverProtocol = System.getProperty("SERVER_PROTOCOL"); > String clientProtocol = System.getProperty("CLIENT_PROTOCOL"); > int port = jdk.testlibrary.Utils.getFreePort(); > > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > On 03.03.2016 15:55, Xuelei Fan wrote: >> Looks fine to me. Please pass JPRT before pushing. >> >> On 3/3/2016 8:41 PM, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>> Little reminder. >>> >> Thanks! >> >> Xuelei >> >>> On 29.02.2016 18:05, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>>> Sean, >>>> thank you! >>>> >>>> Xue-Lei, >>>> if you don't mind could you please take a look? Original tests were >>>> already reviewed by you, I've just added latter tests' fixes. >>>> Webrev: >>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Svetlana >>>> >>>> On 25.02.2016 15:49, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but subject to peer code review before pushing. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Sean. >>>>> >>>>> On 25/02/2016 12:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>> please review and approve tests' backport from jdk9. Tests were >>>>>> combined with there fixes. >>>>>> Originally reviewed Xue-Lei Fan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Webrev: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8048607/webrev.00/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Please find detailed info below: >>>>>> >>>>>> "8041781: Need new regression tests for PBE keys" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041781 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-June/010705.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/28da5b382a13 >>>>>> >>>>>> "8049432: New tests for TLS property jdk.tls.client.protocols" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049432 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011483.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/306c2e872d8f >>>>>> + fix for that test: >>>>>> "8069038: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TLSClientPropertyTest.java needs to be >>>>>> updated for JDK-8061210" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069038 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011645.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/e57fae04212b >>>>>> >>>>>> "8050460: JAAS login/logout tests with LoginContext" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050460 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012674.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/3eccb33e612a >>>>>> >>>>>> "8049237: Need new tests for X509V3 certificates" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049237 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012732.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7a555c3509d2 >>>>>> >>>>>> "8049429: Tests for java client server communications with various >>>>>> TLS/SSL combinations." >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049429 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-September/011140.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b1ad730c120a >>>>>> + test fix "8061464: A typo in CipherTestUtils test" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8061464 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-October/011352.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c17ad02a6268 >>>>>> + test fix "8069253: javax/net/ssl/TLS/TestJSSE.java failed on Mac" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8069253 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012455.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/93ced310c728 >>>>>> + fix for that test from "8061210: Issues in TLS" >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6c16bc68f187 >>>>>> >>>>>> "8048607: Test key generation of DES and DESEDE" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048607 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-January/011569.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/b868adbb539e >>>>>> >>>>>> "8048599: Tests for key wrap and unwrap operations" >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048599 >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011965.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK 9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c5c8b1850425 >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>> Svetlana > From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Fri Mar 4 09:57:21 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 10:57:21 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8129419 - heapDumper.cpp: assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy In-Reply-To: <56D88629.1060608@oracle.com> References: <56C5F423.80603@oracle.com> <56C729B2.6050706@oracle.com> <56C72DC1.2050304@oracle.com> <56D88629.1060608@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56D95C01.5030203@oracle.com> Thanks Dan. - Andreas On 2016-03-03 19:44, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: > > Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ > > hotspot > > src/os/solaris/vm/os_solaris.cpp > No comments. > > src/share/vm/services/heapDumper.cpp > No comments. > > > > jdk > > src/share/classes/com/sun/tools/hat/internal/parser/HprofReader.java > No comments. > > > Also compared the JDK9 version of the hotspot fix with the JDK8u version > of the hotspot fix and I concur with the need for the differences. The > HprofReader.java are identical (compared the versions from the two > different repos). > > Thumbs up! > > Dan > > > On 2/19/16 7:59 AM, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >> OK, thanks. >> >> - Andreas >> >> On 2016-02-19 15:41, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Andreas, >>> >>> Given that the code has changed for the backport, I'd suggest you >>> seek a JDK 8u Reviewer to check this in addition to Dmitry. I'll >>> check if the process can be enhanced for such scenarios. >>> >>> Approved for jdk8u-dev but pending review. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 18/02/16 16:41, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of 8129419: heapDumper.cpp: >>>> assert(length_in_bytes > 0) failed: nothing to copy >>>> >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8129419 >>>> Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aeriksso/8129419/webrev.jdk8.00/ >>>> Review thread: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-February/018862.html >>>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Samersoff (dsamersoff) >>>> >>>> If I've understood it correctly, a review by Dmitry is enough since >>>> he reviewed the JDK 9 version, even though he is not an 8u reviewer? >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Andreas >>> >> >> > From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Tue Mar 8 12:23:30 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 13:23:30 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8151064: com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently Message-ID: <56DEC442.3040801@oracle.com> Hi, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8151064: com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151064 JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/7e330efd38d6 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-March/019005.html Regards, Andreas From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Mar 8 13:47:40 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 22:47:40 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8151064: com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently In-Reply-To: <56DEC442.3040801@oracle.com> References: <56DEC442.3040801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56DED7FC.6040304@oracle.com> approved for push to 8u-dev Please be sure to add an appropriate noreg label to the bug report before pushing: [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Cheers, -Buck On 2016/03/08 21:23, Andreas Eriksson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8151064: > com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently > The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. > > Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151064 > JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/7e330efd38d6 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-March/019005.html > > > Regards, > Andreas From andreas.eriksson at oracle.com Tue Mar 8 16:17:19 2016 From: andreas.eriksson at oracle.com (Andreas Eriksson) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 17:17:19 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for CR JDK-8151064: com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently In-Reply-To: <56DED7FC.6040304@oracle.com> References: <56DEC442.3040801@oracle.com> <56DED7FC.6040304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56DEFB0F.2090108@oracle.com> On 2016-03-08 14:47, david buck wrote: > approved for push to 8u-dev > Thanks. > Please be sure to add an appropriate noreg label to the bug report > before pushing: > Added noreg-self. - Andreas > [ noreg bug labels ] > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg > > Cheers, > -Buck > > On 2016/03/08 21:23, Andreas Eriksson wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8151064: >> com/sun/jdi/RedefineAddPrivateMethod.sh fails intermittently >> The changeset from JDK 9 applies cleanly. >> >> Bug URL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151064 >> JDK 9 Changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-rt/jdk/rev/7e330efd38d6 >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-March/019005.html >> >> >> >> Regards, >> Andreas From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 9 13:41:10 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 13:41:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56D86E53.4010504@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> <56D49E03.8070407@oracle.com> <56D86E53.4010504@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E027F6.6040503@oracle.com> Apologies for the delay. This is now approved for jdk8u-dev but with a caveat. The quality team are concerned with putting such a change into the update releases. For the short term, let's put the new features behind a flag and let's have the new feature off by default. Such intrinsics flags already exist in the hotspot code. I'd suggest that you push the code as is and follow up with the default flag change in a separate bug ID. I would ask that both 8081778 and 8130150 enhancements be off by default. We can document how to switch them on. Once enough testing is done, they should be switched on by default (in a later update release) Regards, Sean. On 03/03/16 17:03, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: > Sean, do you have other concerns? > > Thanks, > Vladimir > > On 2/29/16 11:37 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> I filed: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150878 >> >> Vladimir >> >> On 2/26/16 8:04 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>> Hello Sean >>> >>> I have filled such bug yet because I haven't pushed the changeset yet, >>> so the "bug" isn't present at the moment in any of java repos. >>> >>> Vladimir. >>> >>> On 26.02.2016 18:31, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>> Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, >>>> >>>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>>> >>>> can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to >>>> JDK-8130150 >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Sean. >>>> >>>> On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>>>> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue >>>>> with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u and >>>>> 7u. As result next changes where made: >>>>> >>>>> + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 >>>>> + //on jdk7 and jdk8. >>>>> +#ifndef SOLARIS >>>>> if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { >>>>> +#else >>>>> + if (0) { >>>>> +#endif >>>>> ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); >>>>> >>>>> Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some >>>>> range of values. >>>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Vladimir >>>>> >>>>> On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>>>>> Hello >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >>>>>> >>>>>> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >>>>>> >>>>>> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >>>>>> >>>>>> Testing: jprt, testcase. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >>>>>> Webrev for >>>>>> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >>>>>> Webrev for jdk: >>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> -Vladimir >>>>>> >>>> >>> From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Wed Mar 9 13:49:27 2016 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:49:27 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8130150: Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic In-Reply-To: <56E027F6.6040503@oracle.com> References: <56C750F8.405@oracle.com> <56C75DCA.1070408@oracle.com> <56D06FBD.90407@oracle.com> <56D077A8.2070204@oracle.com> <56D49E03.8070407@oracle.com> <56D86E53.4010504@oracle.com> <56E027F6.6040503@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E029E7.4080209@oracle.com> Hello Sean. I've created https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151522 and will work on it. Thanks, Vladimir. On 09.03.2016 16:41, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Apologies for the delay. This is now approved for jdk8u-dev but with a > caveat. The quality team are concerned with putting such a change into > the update releases. For the short term, let's put the new features > behind a flag and let's have the new feature off by default. Such > intrinsics flags already exist in the hotspot code. > > I'd suggest that you push the code as is and follow up with the > default flag change in a separate bug ID. I would ask that both > 8081778 and 8130150 enhancements be off by default. We can document > how to switch them on. Once enough testing is done, they should be > switched on by default (in a later update release) > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 03/03/16 17:03, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >> Sean, do you have other concerns? >> >> Thanks, >> Vladimir >> >> On 2/29/16 11:37 AM, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>> I filed: >>> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150878 >>> >>> Vladimir >>> >>> On 2/26/16 8:04 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>>> Hello Sean >>>> >>>> I have filled such bug yet because I haven't pushed the changeset yet, >>>> so the "bug" isn't present at the moment in any of java repos. >>>> >>>> Vladimir. >>>> >>>> On 26.02.2016 18:31, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>>>> Vladimir Kozlov, Vladimir Kempik, >>>>> >>>>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>>>> >>>>> can one of you give the bug ID capturing this ? Please link it to >>>>> JDK-8130150 >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Sean. >>>>> >>>>> On 19/02/16 18:24, Vladimir Kozlov wrote: >>>>>> Changes are reviewed. There is difference from jdk9 because of issue >>>>>> with code generated by SunStudio C++ version used to build jdk 8u >>>>>> and >>>>>> 7u. As result next changes where made: >>>>>> >>>>>> + //montgomery_square fails to pass BigIntegerTest on solaris amd64 >>>>>> + //on jdk7 and jdk8. >>>>>> +#ifndef SOLARIS >>>>>> if (len >= MONTGOMERY_SQUARING_THRESHOLD) { >>>>>> +#else >>>>>> + if (0) { >>>>>> +#endif >>>>>> ::montgomery_square(a, n, m, (unsigned long)inv, longwords); >>>>>> >>>>>> Note, this change is fine since it affects only performance for some >>>>>> range of values. >>>>>> Separate bug is filed to resolve this issue later. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Vladimir >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2/19/16 9:29 AM, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >>>>>>> Hello >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to port this fix into 8u-dev. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Implement BigInteger.montgomeryMultiply intrinsic >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The patch has two parts, for jdk and hotspot. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Testing: jprt, testcase. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130150 >>>>>>> Webrev for >>>>>>> hotspot:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_hs.01/ >>>>>>> Webrev for jdk: >>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8130150/webrev_jdk.00/ >>>>>>> Review thread: >>>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-February/021321.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> -Vladimir >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> > From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Wed Mar 9 16:18:44 2016 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 19:18:44 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8151522: Disable 8130150 and 8081778 intrinsics by default Message-ID: <56E04CE4.3080706@oracle.com> Hello I'd like to push this fix into 8u-dev afte the positive review. Disable 8130150 and 8081778 intrinsics by default. Testing: jprt, testcase. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151522 Webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8151522/webrev.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-March/021877.html Thanks -Vladimir From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 9 16:23:10 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:23:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8151522: Disable 8130150 and 8081778 intrinsics by default In-Reply-To: <56E04CE4.3080706@oracle.com> References: <56E04CE4.3080706@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E04DEE.8090708@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. Regards, Sean. On 09/03/16 16:18, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > Hello > > I'd like to push this fix into 8u-dev afte the positive review. > > Disable 8130150 and 8081778 intrinsics by default. > > Testing: jprt, testcase. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151522 > Webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8151522/webrev.00/ > > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-March/021877.html > > Thanks > -Vladimir > From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Fri Mar 11 10:44:37 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:44:37 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8041787: Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms and 8048362: Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice Message-ID: <56E2A195.3080301@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve a direct backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. Tests were originally reviewed by Vincent Ryan. "Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041787 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010866.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a773deb92ef7 and "Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048362 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010867.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/29ad5682c4f2 Thank you, Svetlana From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Mar 11 14:02:15 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:02:15 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8041787: Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms and 8048362: Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice In-Reply-To: <56E2A195.3080301@oracle.com> References: <56E2A195.3080301@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160311140215.GA2438@vimes> Approved assuming the patches apply cleanly. -Rob On 11/03/16 01:44, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve a direct backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. > > Tests were originally reviewed by Vincent Ryan. > > "Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041787 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010866.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a773deb92ef7 > > and > > "Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048362 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010867.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/29ad5682c4f2 > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Fri Mar 11 14:20:49 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:20:49 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8041787: Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms and 8048362: Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice In-Reply-To: <20160311140215.GA2438@vimes> References: <56E2A195.3080301@oracle.com> <20160311140215.GA2438@vimes> Message-ID: <56E2D441.1000101@oracle.com> Rob, thank you for approval! Yes, patches applied cleanly. Thank you, Svetlana On 11.03.2016 17:02, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved assuming the patches apply cleanly. > > -Rob > > On 11/03/16 01:44, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please approve a direct backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. >> >> Tests were originally reviewed by Vincent Ryan. >> >> "Need new regressions tests for buffer handling for PBE algorithms" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041787 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010866.html >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a773deb92ef7 >> >> and >> >> "Tests for doPrivileged with accomplice" >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048362 >> Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-July/010867.html >> JDK 9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/29ad5682c4f2 >> >> Thank you, >> Svetlana >> >> From bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com Sun Mar 13 04:59:07 2016 From: bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com (Bhanu Gopularam) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 20:59:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for 8146123: Implement tests for new functionality provided in JEP 166 Message-ID: <2dd70445-fa35-4745-8dd6-a688de1476a4@default> Hi, Please approve following backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. Only additional change is that in java/security/KeyStore/PKCS12/CheckDefaults.java the default keystore type checked for "jks" instead of "pkcs12 "(In JDK-9 default keytore type is "pkcs12"). Tests were originally reviewed by Vincent Ryan. BugId: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146123 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bgopularam/8146123/webrev.00/ JDK-9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012507.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/d84d9dc7b20f Thanks, Bhanu From sean.coffey at oracle.com Sun Mar 13 11:51:16 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2016 11:51:16 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for 8146123: Implement tests for new functionality provided in JEP 166 In-Reply-To: <2dd70445-fa35-4745-8dd6-a688de1476a4@default> References: <2dd70445-fa35-4745-8dd6-a688de1476a4@default> Message-ID: <56E55434.3060208@oracle.com> Bhanu, we don't use the backport ID for code reviews, approval requests or push comments. Please ensure you use 8048830 in your changeset commit comment. Looks fine. Approved for jdk8u-dev forest. Regards, Sean. On 13/03/2016 04:59, Bhanu Gopularam wrote: > Hi, > > > > Please approve following backport of regression tests to 8u-dev. Only additional change is that in java/security/KeyStore/PKCS12/CheckDefaults.java the default keystore type checked for "jks" instead of "pkcs12 "(In JDK-9 default keytore type is "pkcs12"). > > > > Tests were originally reviewed by Vincent Ryan. > > > > BugId: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8146123 > > > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bgopularam/8146123/webrev.00/ > > > > JDK-9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012507.html > > > > JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/d84d9dc7b20f > > > > Thanks, > > Bhanu From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Mon Mar 14 14:36:52 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 17:36:52 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8151731: Add new jtreg keyword to jdk 8 Message-ID: <56E6CC84.50400@oracle.com> Hello, please approve 2 additional jtreg keywords used in jdk 9: "intermittent" and "randomness". This test's marking can be useful by itself and will simplify tests' and test's fixes backporting. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151731 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8151731/webrev.00/ Thank you, Svetlana From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Mar 14 14:57:41 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 14:57:41 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8151731: Add new jtreg keyword to jdk 8 In-Reply-To: <56E6CC84.50400@oracle.com> References: <56E6CC84.50400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E6D165.5070309@oracle.com> Svetlana, does it make sense to introduce such keywords without modifying the tests that need them ? i.e. should 8078334 be backported ? It would be nice to get such keywords documented in a OpenJDK wiki somewhere. (if one exists, please add to master record) I see a reference to some mail threads in the master record but that's not a substitute for docs IMO. Regards, Sean. On 14/03/16 14:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > please approve 2 additional jtreg keywords used in jdk 9: > "intermittent" and "randomness". > This test's marking can be useful by itself and will simplify tests' > and test's fixes backporting. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151731 > > webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8151731/webrev.00/ > > > Thank you, > Svetlana > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Mon Mar 14 15:19:34 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 18:19:34 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-4515292: ReferenceType.isStatic() returns true for arrays In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E6D686.2000406@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-4515292 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4515292) The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly. So there is no need for webrev. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/281577c18568 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-February/014228.html Thanks, Alexander From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Mar 14 16:35:04 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 16:35:04 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-4515292: ReferenceType.isStatic() returns true for arrays In-Reply-To: <56E6D686.2000406@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56E6D686.2000406@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E6E838.8070000@oracle.com> Hi Alexander, Please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. Approved. -Rob On 14/03/16 15:19, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-4515292 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4515292) > > The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly. So there is no need for webrev. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/281577c18568 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-February/014228.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 15 07:48:34 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 07:48:34 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <56A6A1A7.7030008@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> <20160125201343.GA3839@redhat.com> <56A6A1A7.7030008@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E7BE52.8090805@oracle.com> I see that this change was approved via CCC request also. Consider this approved for jdk8u-dev integration. Regards, Sean. On 25/01/2016 22:28, Sean Coffey wrote: > > 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 sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 15 08:03:10 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 08:03:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval for Backport: 8151352 (8151574), jdk/test/sample fails with "effective library path is outside the test suite" In-Reply-To: <56E7A12E.9030805@oracle.com> References: <56E7A12E.9030805@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E7C1BE.3070303@oracle.com> Please don't use backport IDs in email communication or approval requests. Use the master bug ID in your changeset commit comment. I've edited the subject line to include master bug ID (8151352). Approved. The jtreg upgrade disrupted test results for quite a few teams (again). https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 is another one that needs attention. Regards, Sean. On 15/03/2016 05:44, Felix Yang wrote: > Hi there, > please approve the backport of 8151574 from 9 to 8. > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151574/webrev.00/ > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151574 > Changeset in jdk9: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/dbb0fd7f2a2b > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039332.html > > Thanks, > Felix From poonam.bajaj at oracle.com Tue Mar 15 12:53:55 2016 From: poonam.bajaj at oracle.com (Poonam Bajaj Parhar) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 05:53:55 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly In-Reply-To: <56CCB117.5050005@oracle.com> References: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> <56CC67A0.2020105@oracle.com> <56CCAC1A.3030109@oracle.com> <56CCAFE7.8090404@oracle.com> <56CCB117.5050005@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E805E3.8030306@oracle.com> Hello Rob, I discussed this with Jon Masamitsu, and he said that it is very hard to come up with a testcase to determine that the correct number of Parallel GC threads have been created for a particular platform. We would essentially need to duplicate the entire HotSpot code that calculates the number of Parallel GC threads in the testcase for all the platforms to be able to write this testcase and it is not worth it for this small backport. I have added noreg-hard keyword. Please review and approve this change. Thanks, Poonam >>> On 2/23/2016 6:07 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: >>>> Hi Poonam, >>>> >>>> Why does this have a noreg-self label? (possibly a typo of >>>> noreg-hard?) >> >> Rob, >> >> This was probably my doing. What does noreg-self label mean? >> >> Jon >> >>> Not sure what noreg-self means, it was already added for jdk9. I have >>> added new label noreg-trivial as one can just run 'java >>> +PrintFlagsFinal -version' and check the value of ParallelGCThreads to >>> verify this fix. >>> >>>> >>>> Also, please include a link to the bug in future requests. >>> Sure, will do. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Poonam >>>> >>>> -Rob >>>> >>>> On 23/02/16 14:03, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> Please approve the backport of the following fix to 8u-dev: >>>>> >>>>> CR: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly >>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8133023/webrev.8u/ >>>>> Code review thread: >>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016671.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> JDK9 changeset: >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0b22be0db834 >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Poonam >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> From felix.yang at oracle.com Tue Mar 15 14:38:26 2016 From: felix.yang at oracle.com (Felix Yang) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:38:26 +0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval for Backport: 8151352 (8151574), jdk/test/sample fails with "effective library path is outside the test suite" In-Reply-To: <56E7C1BE.3070303@oracle.com> References: <56E7A12E.9030805@oracle.com> <56E7C1BE.3070303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E81E62.6060303@oracle.com> Hi Sean, thank you for the review. Could you sponsor this change? -Felix On 2016/3/15 16:03, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Please don't use backport IDs in email communication or approval > requests. Use the master bug ID in your changeset commit comment. I've > edited the subject line to include master bug ID (8151352). Approved. > > The jtreg upgrade disrupted test results for quite a few teams > (again). https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 is another > one that needs attention. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 15/03/2016 05:44, Felix Yang wrote: >> Hi there, >> please approve the backport of 8151574 from 9 to 8. >> >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151574/webrev.00/ >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151574 >> Changeset in jdk9: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/dbb0fd7f2a2b >> Review: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039332.html >> >> Thanks, >> Felix > From neugens at redhat.com Tue Mar 15 14:52:00 2016 From: neugens at redhat.com (Mario Torre) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:52:00 +0100 Subject: About JDK-8137571 Message-ID: Hi all, I'm interested in backporting this change to 8u: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8137571 Before I go on and rework/test the patch on 8 I would like to know if this is desired (or if you are already planning to do that!). Cheers, Mario From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 15 15:58:21 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 15:58:21 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly In-Reply-To: <56E805E3.8030306@oracle.com> References: <56CC66C7.6040602@oracle.com> <56CC67A0.2020105@oracle.com> <56CCAC1A.3030109@oracle.com> <56CCAFE7.8090404@oracle.com> <56CCB117.5050005@oracle.com> <56E805E3.8030306@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E8311D.7030804@oracle.com> Thanks Poonam, sounds good. -Rob On 15/03/16 12:53, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: > Hello Rob, > > I discussed this with Jon Masamitsu, and he said that it is very hard to > come up with a testcase to determine that the correct number of Parallel > GC threads have been created for a particular platform. We would > essentially need to duplicate the entire HotSpot code that calculates > the number of Parallel GC threads in the testcase for all the platforms > to be able to write this testcase and it is not worth it for this small > backport. > > I have added noreg-hard keyword. Please review and approve this change. > > Thanks, > Poonam > >>>> On 2/23/2016 6:07 AM, Rob McKenna wrote: >>>>> Hi Poonam, >>>>> >>>>> Why does this have a noreg-self label? (possibly a typo of >>>>> noreg-hard?) >>> >>> Rob, >>> >>> This was probably my doing. What does noreg-self label mean? >>> >>> Jon >>> >>>> Not sure what noreg-self means, it was already added for jdk9. I have >>>> added new label noreg-trivial as one can just run 'java >>>> +PrintFlagsFinal -version' and check the value of ParallelGCThreads to >>>> verify this fix. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Also, please include a link to the bug in future requests. >>>> Sure, will do. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Poonam >>>>> >>>>> -Rob >>>>> >>>>> On 23/02/16 14:03, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please approve the backport of the following fix to 8u-dev: >>>>>> >>>>>> CR: JDK-8133023: ParallelGCThreads is not calculated correctly >>>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~poonam/8133023/webrev.8u/ >>>>>> Code review thread: >>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-February/016671.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> JDK9 changeset: >>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/0b22be0db834 >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Poonam >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 16 15:01:44 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 15:01:44 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval for Backport: 8151352 (8151574), jdk/test/sample fails with "effective library path is outside the test suite" In-Reply-To: <56E81E62.6060303@oracle.com> References: <56E7A12E.9030805@oracle.com> <56E7C1BE.3070303@oracle.com> <56E81E62.6060303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E97558.80103@oracle.com> On 15/03/16 14:38, Felix Yang wrote: > Hi Sean, > thank you for the review. Could you sponsor this change? Pushed : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/2e0399f66ddc regards, Sean. > > -Felix > On 2016/3/15 16:03, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Please don't use backport IDs in email communication or approval >> requests. Use the master bug ID in your changeset commit comment. >> I've edited the subject line to include master bug ID (8151352). >> Approved. >> >> The jtreg upgrade disrupted test results for quite a few teams >> (again). https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 is another >> one that needs attention. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 15/03/2016 05:44, Felix Yang wrote: >>> Hi there, >>> please approve the backport of 8151574 from 9 to 8. >>> >>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151574/webrev.00/ >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151574 >>> Changeset in jdk9: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/dbb0fd7f2a2b >>> Review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039332.html >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Felix >> > From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Wed Mar 16 15:37:33 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 18:37:33 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements - part 2 Message-ID: <56E97DBD.7000802@oracle.com> Hello, please approve a backport of next tests from jdk9. One test is combined with it's fix. All patched applied cleanly. Originally reviewed Valerie Peng. 8048604: Tests for strong crypto ciphers https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048604 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012817.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c9b4bc199dca + fix for that test 8137068: Tests added in JDK-8048604 fail to compile https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8137068 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012833.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/86e39496209e 8048596: Tests for AEAD ciphers https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048596 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012610.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/06c8b6dc07a2 8048819: Implement reliability test for DH algorithm https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048819 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011484.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/67530286d394 8075286: Additional tests for signature algorithm OIDs and transformation string https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075286 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012832.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a831c364751d 8048624: Tests for SealedObject https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048624 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012607.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d482d224fb7b Thank you, Svetlana From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 16 16:46:13 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 16:46:13 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements - part 2 In-Reply-To: <56E97DBD.7000802@oracle.com> References: <56E97DBD.7000802@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56E98DD5.4080201@oracle.com> Approved. -Rob On 16/03/16 15:37, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > please approve a backport of next tests from jdk9. One test is combined > with it's fix. All patched applied cleanly. > Originally reviewed Valerie Peng. > > 8048604: Tests for strong crypto ciphers > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048604 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012817.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c9b4bc199dca > > + fix for that test > 8137068: Tests added in JDK-8048604 fail to compile > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8137068 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012833.html > > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/86e39496209e > > > 8048596: Tests for AEAD ciphers > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048596 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012610.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/06c8b6dc07a2 > > > 8048819: Implement reliability test for DH algorithm > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048819 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011484.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/67530286d394 > > > 8075286: Additional tests for signature algorithm OIDs and > transformation string > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075286 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-September/012832.html > > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/a831c364751d > > > 8048624: Tests for SealedObject > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048624 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012607.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d482d224fb7b > > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > > > > From felix.yang at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 01:49:22 2016 From: felix.yang at oracle.com (Felix Yang) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:49:22 +0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval for Backport: 8151352 (8151574), jdk/test/sample fails with "effective library path is outside the test suite" In-Reply-To: <56E97558.80103@oracle.com> References: <56E7A12E.9030805@oracle.com> <56E7C1BE.3070303@oracle.com> <56E81E62.6060303@oracle.com> <56E97558.80103@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EA0D22.4010600@oracle.com> Hi Sean, thank you very much. BTW, I will look into https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 you mentioned. -Felix On 2016/3/16 23:01, Se?n Coffey wrote: > > On 15/03/16 14:38, Felix Yang wrote: >> Hi Sean, >> thank you for the review. Could you sponsor this change? > > Pushed : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/2e0399f66ddc > > regards, > Sean. >> >> -Felix >> On 2016/3/15 16:03, Se?n Coffey wrote: >>> Please don't use backport IDs in email communication or approval >>> requests. Use the master bug ID in your changeset commit comment. >>> I've edited the subject line to include master bug ID (8151352). >>> Approved. >>> >>> The jtreg upgrade disrupted test results for quite a few teams >>> (again). https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 is another >>> one that needs attention. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Sean. >>> >>> On 15/03/2016 05:44, Felix Yang wrote: >>>> Hi there, >>>> please approve the backport of 8151574 from 9 to 8. >>>> >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151574/webrev.00/ >>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151574 >>>> Changeset in jdk9: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/dbb0fd7f2a2b >>>> Review: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039332.html >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Felix >>> >> > From felix.yang at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 07:07:01 2016 From: felix.yang at oracle.com (Felix Yang) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:07:01 +0800 Subject: [8u-dev] RFR 8151535: java/lang/invoke/AccessControlTest.java should be modified to run with JTREG 4.1 b13 In-Reply-To: <5660DD92.8070506@oracle.com> References: <5660DD92.8070506@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EA5795.5090101@oracle.com> Hi there, please, help to review the fix for test 'java/lang/invoke/AccessControlTest.java'. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151535/webrev.00/ This fix removed "@library ../../../...", which is invalid with the latest change in jtreg. See https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7901585. I need a sponsor for this change. Thanks, Felix From fairoz.matte at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 07:10:15 2016 From: fairoz.matte at oracle.com (Fairoz Matte) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 00:10:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8150518: G1 GC crashes at G1CollectedHeap::do_collection_pause_at_safepoint(double) Message-ID: Hi, Please approve this patch for jdk8u-dev? Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150518 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8150518/webrev.01/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-March/018317.html Testing: All the relevant test cases. Thanks, Fairoz From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 09:03:34 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:03:34 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFR 8151535: java/lang/invoke/AccessControlTest.java should be modified to run with JTREG 4.1 b13 In-Reply-To: <56EA5795.5090101@oracle.com> References: <5660DD92.8070506@oracle.com> <56EA5795.5090101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EA72E6.3060908@oracle.com> Approved. I'll push this for you. Regards, Sean. On 17/03/2016 07:07, Felix Yang wrote: > Hi there, > please, help to review the fix for test > 'java/lang/invoke/AccessControlTest.java'. > > Bug: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151535 > Webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xiaofeya/8151535/webrev.00/ > > This fix removed "@library ../../../...", which is invalid with the > latest change in jtreg. See > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7901585. > I need a sponsor for this change. > > Thanks, > Felix From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 09:56:25 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 09:56:25 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8150518: G1 GC crashes at G1CollectedHeap::do_collection_pause_at_safepoint(double) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56EA7F49.1000603@oracle.com> Looks like this is not applicable to JDK 9. If so, please add the 9-na label. Also - is there a testcase present that tests your code change ? If so, please add the bug ID to the @bug tag in it. If not, you need to add a noreg- label to the bug report. Approved. Regards, Sean. On 17/03/2016 07:10, Fairoz Matte wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve this patch for jdk8u-dev? > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150518 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8150518/webrev.01/ > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016-March/018317.html > > Testing: All the relevant test cases. > > Thanks, > Fairoz From fairoz.matte at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 10:34:06 2016 From: fairoz.matte at oracle.com (Fairoz Matte) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 03:34:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8150518: G1 GC crashes at G1CollectedHeap::do_collection_pause_at_safepoint(double) In-Reply-To: <56EA7F49.1000603@oracle.com> References: <56EA7F49.1000603@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Se?n Coffey, Thanks for your review comments. I have modified accordingly. Thanks, Fairoz > -----Original Message----- > From: Se?n Coffey > Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 3:26 PM > To: Fairoz Matte; jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > Subject: Re: [8u-dev] RFA 8150518: G1 GC crashes at > G1CollectedHeap::do_collection_pause_at_safepoint(double) > > Looks like this is not applicable to JDK 9. If so, please add the 9-na > label. > > Also - is there a testcase present that tests your code change ? If so, > please add the bug ID to the @bug tag in it. If not, you need to add a > noreg- label to the bug report. > > Approved. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 17/03/2016 07:10, Fairoz Matte wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Please approve this patch for jdk8u-dev? > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150518 > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8150518/webrev.01/ > > Review thread: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2016- > March/ > > 018317.html > > > > Testing: All the relevant test cases. > > > > Thanks, > > Fairoz > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 12:30:38 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 15:30:38 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-6976636: JVM/TI test ex03t001 fails assertion In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAA36E.4070903@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-6976636 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6976636) The JDK 9 changeset does not applies clearly so here is webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8145420/webrev.00/ The only difference is that there is no changes in the copyright header in JDK 8 backport. The significant part of changeset is absolutely the same as in the original JDK 9 fix. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/d9c2726a4960 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2014-March/012983.html Thanks, Alexander From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 12:33:15 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 12:33:15 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-6976636: JVM/TI test ex03t001 fails assertion In-Reply-To: <56EAA36E.4070903@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56EAA36E.4070903@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAA40B.5010308@oracle.com> Looks fine. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 17/03/2016 12:30, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-6976636 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6976636) > > The JDK 9 changeset does not applies clearly so here is webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kshefov/8145420/webrev.00/ > The only difference is that there is no changes in the copyright > header in JDK 8 backport. The significant part of changeset is > absolutely the same as in the original JDK 9 fix. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/d9c2726a4960 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2014-March/012983.html > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 13:02:26 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:02:26 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8035493: JVMTI PopFrame capability must instruct compilers not to prune locals In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAAAE2.8070009@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8035493 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035493) The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly with 2 lines offset in one file ( src/share/vm/ci/ciEnv.cpp). Judging by changes history it caused by difference in previously integrated changes in JDK 8 and JDK 9 versions of this file. So looks like there is no need for webrev. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/96d2c94bbdd0 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2014-February/010980.html Thanks, Alexander From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 13:32:47 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 13:32:47 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8035493: JVMTI PopFrame capability must instruct compilers not to prune locals In-Reply-To: <56EAAAE2.8070009@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56EAAAE2.8070009@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAB1FF.3070104@oracle.com> I hope this brings no compatibility issues with it. cc'ing Markus also, the original author. Approved but subject to Markus being ok with this going into jdk8u. Regards, Sean. On 17/03/2016 13:02, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8035493 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035493) > > The JDK 9 changeset applies clearly with 2 lines offset in one file ( > src/share/vm/ci/ciEnv.cpp). Judging by changes history it caused by > difference in previously integrated changes in JDK 8 and JDK 9 > versions of this file. So looks like there is no need for webrev. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/96d2c94bbdd0 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2014-February/010980.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 16:07:10 2016 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 19:07:10 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8152098: Fix 8151522 caused test compiler/intrinsics/squaretolen/TestSquareToLen.java to fail Message-ID: <56EAD62E.1020703@oracle.com> Hello I'd like to push this fix into 8u-dev after the positive review. Simple changeset to fix testcase failing after 8152098. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152098 Webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8152098/webrev.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-March/021977.html Thanks -Vladimir From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 18:03:51 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 18:03:51 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA 8152098: Fix 8151522 caused test compiler/intrinsics/squaretolen/TestSquareToLen.java to fail In-Reply-To: <56EAD62E.1020703@oracle.com> References: <56EAD62E.1020703@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAF187.9060804@oracle.com> Approved pending positive review. -Rob On 17/03/16 16:07, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > Hello > > I'd like to push this fix into 8u-dev after the positive review. > > Simple changeset to fix testcase failing after 8152098. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152098 > Webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8152098/webrev.00/ > > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-compiler-dev/2016-March/021977.html > > > Thanks > -Vladimir > From philip.race at oracle.com Thu Mar 17 18:23:41 2016 From: philip.race at oracle.com (Phil Race) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 11:23:41 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval for bug 8147807: crash in libkcms.so on linux-sparc In-Reply-To: <56C1941F.3040900@oracle.com> References: <56BC9860.7050006@oracle.com> <56BD9576.4090904@oracle.com> <56BDA2AF.9000209@oracle.com> <56C1941F.3040900@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EAF62D.60102@oracle.com> +1 -phil. On 02/15/2016 01:02 AM, Erik Joelsson wrote: > Looks good. > /Erik > > On 2016-02-12 10:15, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Approved for jdk8u-dev once you have a peer code review. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 12/02/2016 08:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >>> I forgot to add jdk8u-dev list... >>> >>> On 11.02.2016 17:19, Alexey Ivanov wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> Could you please review the fix for JDK-8147807 and approve push to >>>> 8u-dev? >>>> >>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8147807 >>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aivanov/8147807/jdk8/webrev.00/ >>>> >>>> The issue is not relevant to jdk 9. >>>> >>>> The fix just removes kcms service leaving lcms as the only option >>>> which is the default in jdk8. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance, >>>> Alexey >>> >> > From omajid at redhat.com Thu Mar 17 21:57:20 2016 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2016 17:57:20 -0400 Subject: [8u] Request for approval for CR 8140620 - Find and load default.sf2 as the default soundbank on Linux In-Reply-To: <56E7BE52.8090805@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> <20160125201343.GA3839@redhat.com> <56A6A1A7.7030008@oracle.com> <56E7BE52.8090805@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160317215720.GF3940@redhat.com> * Se?n Coffey [2016-03-15 03:48]: > I see that this change was approved via CCC request also. Consider this > approved for jdk8u-dev integration. Thanks, Glad to see it was all sorted out through CCC! I have pushed the change: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/5b8ec82dc4d3 Omair -- PGP Key: 66484681 (http://pgp.mit.edu/) Fingerprint = F072 555B 0A17 3957 4E95 0056 F286 F14F 6648 4681 From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Fri Mar 18 15:59:37 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 18:59:37 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements - part 3 Message-ID: <56EC25E9.1030208@oracle.com> Hello, please approve a backport of next tests from jdk9. All patches applied cleanly. Originally reviewed by Max Wang. 8048138: Tests for JAAS callbacks https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048138 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/012020.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/1e5cc55ae5d3 8048618: Tests for PKCS12 write operations. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048618 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-March/011893.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/20f32289a9a9 8048617: Tests for PKCS12 read operations https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048617 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011096.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/785858138c56 8048619: Implement tests for converting PKCS12 keystores https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048619 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011474.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/41e0b5b20312 8048360: Test signed jar files https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048360 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-February/011772.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4503bd758762 8050370: Need new regressions tests for messageDigest with DigestIOStream https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050370 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011082.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7fe9410c355d 8048820: Implement tests for SecretKeyFactory https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048820 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011963.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/92321d7c8a3e 8050461: Tests for syntax checking of JAAS configuration file https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050461 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012405.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/9f8e3bf8376a 8049814: Additional SASL client-server tests https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049814 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012528.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c74dc2b51e9d 8048610: Implement regression test for bug fix of 4686632 in JCE https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048610 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-February/011718.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d5b1b2c14d3f 8048052: Permission tests for setFactory https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048052 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011036.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d877cbb8e2a2 8050427: LoginContext tests to cover JDK-4703361 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050427 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012665.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ebb557eaea32 Thanks, Svetlana From alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com Fri Mar 18 16:45:42 2016 From: alexander.vorobyev at oracle.com (Alexander Vorobyev) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:45:42 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8044772: TempDirTest.java still times out with -Xcomp In-Reply-To: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EC30B6.7030602@oracle.com> Hi All, I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8044772 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044772) The JDK 9 changeset does not apply clearly because of the difference in the changes history. Also there is no changes in ProblemList.txt in this backport because TempDirTest is not presented in this list for JDK 8. So here is webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~arusakov/avorobyev/webrev/ The changeset (except ProblemList.txt mentioned above) is absolutely the same as in original JDK 9 fix. JDK 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/84065ccf6446 JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-June/015066.html Thanks, Alexander From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Mar 18 17:17:42 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:17:42 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: Backport of security test enhancements - part 3 In-Reply-To: <56EC25E9.1030208@oracle.com> References: <56EC25E9.1030208@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EC3836.50001@oracle.com> Approved. Nice work! -Rob On 18/03/16 15:59, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Hello, > > please approve a backport of next tests from jdk9. All patches applied > cleanly. > Originally reviewed by Max Wang. > > 8048138: Tests for JAAS callbacks > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048138 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/012020.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/1e5cc55ae5d3 > > 8048618: Tests for PKCS12 write operations. > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048618 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-March/011893.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/20f32289a9a9 > > 8048617: Tests for PKCS12 read operations > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048617 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011096.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/785858138c56 > > 8048619: Implement tests for converting PKCS12 keystores > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048619 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-December/011474.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/41e0b5b20312 > > 8048360: Test signed jar files > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048360 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-February/011772.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/4503bd758762 > > 8050370: Need new regressions tests for messageDigest with DigestIOStream > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050370 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011082.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7fe9410c355d > > 8048820: Implement tests for SecretKeyFactory > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048820 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-April/011963.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/92321d7c8a3e > > 8050461: Tests for syntax checking of JAAS configuration file > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050461 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-June/012405.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/9f8e3bf8376a > > 8049814: Additional SASL client-server tests > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8049814 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012528.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c74dc2b51e9d > > 8048610: Implement regression test for bug fix of 4686632 in JCE > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048610 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-February/011718.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d5b1b2c14d3f > > 8048052: Permission tests for setFactory > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048052 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2014-August/011036.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d877cbb8e2a2 > > 8050427: LoginContext tests to cover JDK-4703361 > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8050427 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-August/012665.html > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/ebb557eaea32 > > Thanks, > Svetlana > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Mar 18 17:18:41 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 17:18:41 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8044772: TempDirTest.java still times out with -Xcomp In-Reply-To: <56EC30B6.7030602@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56EC30B6.7030602@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56EC3871.1000400@oracle.com> Approved subject to peer review. -Rob On 18/03/16 16:45, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: > > Hi All, > > I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8044772 > (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044772) > > The JDK 9 changeset does not apply clearly because of the difference in > the changes history. Also there is no changes in ProblemList.txt in this > backport because TempDirTest is not presented in this list for JDK 8. > So here is webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~arusakov/avorobyev/webrev/ > > The changeset (except ProblemList.txt mentioned above) is absolutely the > same as in original JDK 9 fix. > > JDK 9 Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/84065ccf6446 > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-June/015066.html > > > Thanks, > Alexander > > > From shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Mon Mar 21 05:35:13 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 22:35:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: RFR [jdk8]: JDK-8150002: Check for the validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set Message-ID: Hi, Please review the backport of bug 'JDK-8150002: Check for the validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set' to jdk8u-dev. This is a trivial backport and it's not clean due to difference in actual parameter of a method between jdk9 and jdk8 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8150002/webrev.00/ jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150002 Backport bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151113 Original patch pushed to jdk9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/55fe28454251 Test: Run jprt Regards, Shafi From thomas.schatzl at oracle.com Mon Mar 21 11:09:15 2016 From: thomas.schatzl at oracle.com (Thomas Schatzl) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 12:09:15 +0100 Subject: RFR [jdk8]: JDK-8150002: Check for the validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1458558555.2237.18.camel@oracle.com> Hi Shafi, On Sun, 2016-03-20 at 22:35 -0700, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi, > > Please review the backport of bug 'JDK-8150002: Check for the > validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set' to jdk8u > -dev. > > > This is a trivial backport and it's not clean due to difference in > actual parameter of a method between jdk9 and jdk8 > looks good. Thomas From fairoz.matte at oracle.com Tue Mar 22 06:54:43 2016 From: fairoz.matte at oracle.com (Fairoz Matte) Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 23:54:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [8u]RFA: JDK-8076995: gc/ergonomics/TestDynamicNumberOfGCThreads.java failed with java.lang.RuntimeException: 'new_active_workers' missing from stdout/stderr Message-ID: <99010d6f-25ad-4d2c-99d0-9c90592b3503@default> Hi, Please approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch. "JDK-8076995: gc/ergonomics/TestDynamicNumberOfGCThreads.java failed with java.lang.RuntimeException: 'new_active_workers' missing from stdout/stderr" Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8076995_8u_ver01/ Jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076995 Jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-gc/hotspot/rev/01d4bdce1f7f Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-March/017128.html Thanks, Fairoz From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 22 08:27:08 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 08:27:08 +0000 Subject: [8u]RFA: JDK-8076995: gc/ergonomics/TestDynamicNumberOfGCThreads.java failed with java.lang.RuntimeException: 'new_active_workers' missing from stdout/stderr In-Reply-To: <99010d6f-25ad-4d2c-99d0-9c90592b3503@default> References: <99010d6f-25ad-4d2c-99d0-9c90592b3503@default> Message-ID: <56F101DC.1060404@oracle.com> Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 22/03/2016 06:54, Fairoz Matte wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve this backport into jdk8u-dev for below patch. > "JDK-8076995: gc/ergonomics/TestDynamicNumberOfGCThreads.java failed with java.lang.RuntimeException: 'new_active_workers' missing from stdout/stderr" > > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8076995_8u_ver01/ > Jdk9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076995 > Jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs-gc/hotspot/rev/01d4bdce1f7f > Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/2016-March/017128.html > > Thanks, > Fairoz From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 00:12:24 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 03:12:24 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8145039: JAXB marshaller fails with ClassCastException on classes generated by xjc Message-ID: <56F1DF68.3050906@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve backport of xjc tool fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. The source fix for this bug was delivered to JDK9 as part of sync process with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The change that fixed reported issue was partially, but cleanly backported to JDK8 CTypeRef class. Original JDK9 changes to this class can be viewed at this location [3]. Test for this issue was backported cleanly. JCK and JTREG tests (including the backported one) were executed over the modified JDK8 without failures. Best Regards, Aleksej JDK8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/de1f0e168eeb JDK9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039553.html JAXWS sync review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039086.html [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145039 [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l34.1 From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 11:16:46 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 20:16:46 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8145039: JAXB marshaller fails with ClassCastException on classes generated by xjc In-Reply-To: <56F1DF68.3050906@oracle.com> References: <56F1DF68.3050906@oracle.com> Message-ID: <8EF42C57-6C82-4959-835C-E6E56865B5F7@oracle.com> approved for push to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review I understand that the code review may seem over-cautious, but as you are only back porting a subset of the original change set, a (hopefully trivial) review is still needed. Cheers, -Buck > On Mar 23, 2016, at 09:12, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > > Hi, > > Please, approve backport of xjc tool fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. > The source fix for this bug was delivered to JDK9 as part of sync process with upstream JAXWS project [2]. > The change that fixed reported issue was partially, but cleanly backported to JDK8 CTypeRef class. Original JDK9 changes to this class can be viewed at this location [3]. > Test for this issue was backported cleanly. JCK and JTREG tests (including the backported one) were executed over the modified JDK8 without failures. > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > JDK8 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/de1f0e168eeb > > JDK9 Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039553.html > > JAXWS sync review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039086.html > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145039 > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 > [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l34.1 > From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 12:39:02 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 15:39:02 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8145039: JAXB marshaller fails with ClassCastException on classes generated by xjc In-Reply-To: <8EF42C57-6C82-4959-835C-E6E56865B5F7@oracle.com> References: <56F1DF68.3050906@oracle.com> <8EF42C57-6C82-4959-835C-E6E56865B5F7@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F28E66.7000900@oracle.com> David, Thanks for approval. Adding corelibs-dev for getting code review. Can someone, please, take a look at the partially backported changes [1]? Best Regards, Aleksej [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 On 03/23/2016 02:16 PM, David Buck wrote: > approved for push to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review > > I understand that the code review may seem over-cautious, but as you are only back porting a subset of the original change set, a (hopefully trivial) review is still needed. > > Cheers, > -Buck > >> On Mar 23, 2016, at 09:12, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Please, approve backport of xjc tool fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. >> The source fix for this bug was delivered to JDK9 as part of sync process with upstream JAXWS project [2]. >> The change that fixed reported issue was partially, but cleanly backported to JDK8 CTypeRef class. Original JDK9 changes to this class can be viewed at this location [3]. >> Test for this issue was backported cleanly. JCK and JTREG tests (including the backported one) were executed over the modified JDK8 without failures. >> >> Best Regards, >> Aleksej >> >> JDK8 webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 >> >> JDK9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/de1f0e168eeb >> >> JDK9 Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039553.html >> >> JAXWS sync review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039086.html >> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145039 >> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 >> [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l34.1 >> From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 14:51:19 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 14:51:19 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8068427: Hashtable deserialization reconstitutes table with wrong capacity Message-ID: <20160323145119.GC2372@vimes> Hi folks, Looking for approval for this clean backport: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068427 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e0ff6048ec5 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030557.html Thanks, -Rob From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 14:58:33 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 14:58:33 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8065078: NetworkInterface.getNetworkInterfaces() triggers intermittent test failures Message-ID: <20160323145833.GD2372@vimes> Hi folks, Looking for approval for this clean backport: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065078 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c3b558249c32 Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-March/008920.html Thanks, -Rob From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 15:44:10 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 15:44:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8065078: NetworkInterface.getNetworkInterfaces() triggers intermittent test failures In-Reply-To: <20160323145833.GD2372@vimes> References: <20160323145833.GD2372@vimes> Message-ID: <56F2B9CA.8020204@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 23/03/16 14:58, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi folks, > > Looking for approval for this clean backport: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8065078 > 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c3b558249c32 > Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2015-March/008920.html > > Thanks, > > -Rob > From lance.andersen at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 15:52:17 2016 From: lance.andersen at oracle.com (Lance Andersen) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 11:52:17 -0400 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8145039: JAXB marshaller fails with ClassCastException on classes generated by xjc In-Reply-To: <56F28E66.7000900@oracle.com> References: <56F1DF68.3050906@oracle.com> <8EF42C57-6C82-4959-835C-E6E56865B5F7@oracle.com> <56F28E66.7000900@oracle.com> Message-ID: <58B3D0D0-2F4F-4CF6-82F0-803A0F0A0B37@oracle.com> looks fine On Mar 23, 2016, at 8:39 AM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > David, > > Thanks for approval. > > Adding corelibs-dev for getting code review. Can someone, please, take a look at the partially backported changes [1]? > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 > > On 03/23/2016 02:16 PM, David Buck wrote: >> approved for push to jdk8u-dev pending successful code review >> >> I understand that the code review may seem over-cautious, but as you are only back porting a subset of the original change set, a (hopefully trivial) review is still needed. >> >> Cheers, >> -Buck >> >>> On Mar 23, 2016, at 09:12, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please, approve backport of xjc tool fix [1] to JDK8u-dev. >>> The source fix for this bug was delivered to JDK9 as part of sync process with upstream JAXWS project [2]. >>> The change that fixed reported issue was partially, but cleanly backported to JDK8 CTypeRef class. Original JDK9 changes to this class can be viewed at this location [3]. >>> Test for this issue was backported cleanly. JCK and JTREG tests (including the backported one) were executed over the modified JDK8 without failures. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Aleksej >>> >>> JDK8 webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8145039/8/00 >>> >>> JDK9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/de1f0e168eeb >>> >>> JDK9 Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039553.html >>> >>> JAXWS sync review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-February/039086.html >>> >>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145039 >>> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 >>> [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l34.1 >>> > Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 Lance.Andersen at oracle.com From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 23 15:55:59 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 15:55:59 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8068427: Hashtable deserialization reconstitutes table with wrong capacity In-Reply-To: <20160323145119.GC2372@vimes> References: <20160323145119.GC2372@vimes> Message-ID: <20160323155559.GB4222@vimes> So this fix exposes a problem in a JCK test. I'll update the alias when its resolved. -Rob On 23/03/16 02:51, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi folks, > > Looking for approval for this clean backport: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068427 > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e0ff6048ec5 > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030557.html > > Thanks, > > -Rob > From vivi.an at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 20:54:06 2016 From: vivi.an at oracle.com (Vivi An) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 13:54:06 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - JDK-8145228 , Java Access Bridge, getAccessibleStatesStringFromContext doesn't wrap the call to getAccessibleRole Message-ID: <56F453EE.9090007@oracle.com> Hi, Looking for approval for this straight back port, only difference is patch won't apply cleanly due to difference between 8/9 directory structure. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145228 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/296dc933c637 Review: https://www.mail-archive.com/swing-dev at openjdk.java.net/msg05345.html Thanks, ~ Vivi From vivi.an at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 22:15:03 2016 From: vivi.an at oracle.com (Vivi An) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 15:15:03 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - JDK-8145228 , Java Access Bridge, getAccessibleStatesStringFromContext doesn't wrap the call to getAccessibleRole In-Reply-To: <56F453EE.9090007@oracle.com> References: <56F453EE.9090007@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F466E7.7030801@oracle.com> Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-February/005434.html On 3/24/2016 1:54 PM, Vivi An wrote: > Hi, > > Looking for approval for this straight back port, only difference is > patch won't apply cleanly due to difference between 8/9 directory > structure. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145228 > 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/296dc933c637 > Review: > https://www.mail-archive.com/swing-dev at openjdk.java.net/msg05345.html > > Thanks, > > ~ Vivi From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 22:29:47 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (david buck) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 07:29:47 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - JDK-8145228 , Java Access Bridge, getAccessibleStatesStringFromContext doesn't wrap the call to getAccessibleRole In-Reply-To: <56F466E7.7030801@oracle.com> References: <56F453EE.9090007@oracle.com> <56F466E7.7030801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F46A5B.1080107@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev Here is the March portion of the review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-March/005476.html Cheers, -Buck On 2016/03/25 7:15, Vivi An wrote: > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-February/005434.html > > On 3/24/2016 1:54 PM, Vivi An wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Looking for approval for this straight back port, only difference is >> patch won't apply cleanly due to difference between 8/9 directory >> structure. >> >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145228 >> 9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/296dc933c637 >> Review: >> https://www.mail-archive.com/swing-dev at openjdk.java.net/msg05345.html >> >> Thanks, >> >> ~ Vivi > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 22:34:07 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 22:34:07 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - JDK-8145228 , Java Access Bridge, getAccessibleStatesStringFromContext doesn't wrap the call to getAccessibleRole In-Reply-To: <56F466E7.7030801@oracle.com> References: <56F453EE.9090007@oracle.com> <56F466E7.7030801@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160324223407.GD7363@vimes> Approved -Rob On 24/03/16 03:15, Vivi An wrote: > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2016-February/005434.html > > On 3/24/2016 1:54 PM, Vivi An wrote: > >Hi, > > > >Looking for approval for this straight back port, only difference is > >patch won't apply cleanly due to difference between 8/9 directory > >structure. > > > >Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145228 > >9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/296dc933c637 > >Review: > >https://www.mail-archive.com/swing-dev at openjdk.java.net/msg05345.html > > > >Thanks, > > > > ~ Vivi > From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 23:38:12 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 02:38:12 +0300 Subject: RFR: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class Message-ID: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> Hi, Please, help to review the fix for JDK-8073872 [1]. In JDK9 this bug was fixed as part of sync with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The changes that fixed stack overflow issue are located in XmlSchemaGenerator class [3]. JDK9 change that needs review is the addition of regression test for this issue: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/9/00/ I will be requesting JDK8 approval for partially backporting the fix for this bug to 8u-dev. Can I also ask to review the JDK8 changes: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00/ Both JDK8/9 changes were tested with JCK/JTREG tests and no failures were observed. New test passes with the fix and successfully reproduces reported stack overflow on JDKs without the fix. Best Regards, Aleksej [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l3.2 From lance.andersen at oracle.com Thu Mar 24 23:41:32 2016 From: lance.andersen at oracle.com (Lance Andersen) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 19:41:32 -0400 Subject: RFR: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class In-Reply-To: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> References: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> Message-ID: I will look at this for you tomorrow Aleksej Best Lance On Mar 24, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Please, help to review the fix for JDK-8073872 [1]. In JDK9 this bug was fixed as part of sync with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The changes that fixed stack overflow issue are located in XmlSchemaGenerator class [3]. > JDK9 change that needs review is the addition of regression test for this issue: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/9/00/ > > I will be requesting JDK8 approval for partially backporting the fix for this bug to 8u-dev. Can I also ask to review the JDK8 changes: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00/ > > Both JDK8/9 changes were tested with JCK/JTREG tests and no failures were observed. New test passes with the fix and successfully reproduces reported stack overflow on JDKs without the fix. > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 > [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l3.2 Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 Lance.Andersen at oracle.com From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 00:06:48 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 03:06:48 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150704: XALAN: ERROR: 'No more DTM IDs are available' when transforming with lots of temporary result trees Message-ID: <56F48118.40201@oracle.com> Hi, Please, approve the backport of JDK-8150704 to JDK8. JAXP classes source fix applies cleanly after reshuffling. The only discrepancy is the test changes: In JDK9 the issue was tested by extending the functionality of existing JDK9 test: jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/TransformerTest.java Current test and test suite is absent in JDK8 and the added test case was backported to JDK8 as a standalone test application: jdk/test/javax/xml/jaxp/transform/8150704 - JDK8 webrev is provided. Also the cleanup changes of test code wasn't backported because tests are absent in JDK8. JTREG/JCK testing shows no failures with backported changes. Best Regards, Aleksej JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150704 JDK8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8150704/8/00/ JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/0fe7231b64a6 JDK9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039272.html From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 15:07:57 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 15:07:57 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150704: XALAN: ERROR: 'No more DTM IDs are available' when transforming with lots of temporary result trees In-Reply-To: <56F48118.40201@oracle.com> References: <56F48118.40201@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160325150757.GB2363@vimes> Hi Aleksej, I'd like to see a review of the 8 change before approval. -Rob On 25/03/16 03:06, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Please, approve the backport of JDK-8150704 to JDK8. JAXP classes source fix > applies cleanly after reshuffling. > The only discrepancy is the test changes: > In JDK9 the issue was tested by extending the functionality of existing JDK9 > test: jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/TransformerTest.java > Current test and test suite is absent in JDK8 and the added test case was > backported to JDK8 as a standalone test application: > jdk/test/javax/xml/jaxp/transform/8150704 - JDK8 webrev is provided. > Also the cleanup changes of test code wasn't backported because tests are > absent in JDK8. > > JTREG/JCK testing shows no failures with backported changes. > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150704 > > JDK8 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8150704/8/00/ > > JDK9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/0fe7231b64a6 > > JDK9 Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039272.html From lance.andersen at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 17:46:18 2016 From: lance.andersen at oracle.com (Lance Andersen) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:46:18 -0400 Subject: RFR: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class In-Reply-To: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> References: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> Message-ID: <14CE4AC5-071F-474A-B48C-0B709286E86D@oracle.com> Looks OK Alejsej On Mar 24, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Please, help to review the fix for JDK-8073872 [1]. In JDK9 this bug was fixed as part of sync with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The changes that fixed stack overflow issue are located in XmlSchemaGenerator class [3]. > JDK9 change that needs review is the addition of regression test for this issue: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/9/00/ > > I will be requesting JDK8 approval for partially backporting the fix for this bug to 8u-dev. Can I also ask to review the JDK8 changes: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00/ > > Both JDK8/9 changes were tested with JCK/JTREG tests and no failures were observed. New test passes with the fix and successfully reproduces reported stack overflow on JDKs without the fix. > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 > [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l3.2 Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 Lance.Andersen at oracle.com From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 19:32:30 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:32:30 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150704: XALAN: ERROR: 'No more DTM IDs are available' when transforming with lots of temporary result trees In-Reply-To: <20160325150757.GB2363@vimes> References: <56F48118.40201@oracle.com> <20160325150757.GB2363@vimes> Message-ID: <56F5924E.2060605@oracle.com> Hi Rob, Sure! Adding corelibs-dev and Joe (JDK9 reviewer). Hi Joe, Can you, please, review the backported changes: The source fix is identical (except file paths), but regression test changes differs. Best Regards, Aleksej On 03/25/2016 06:07 PM, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi Aleksej, > > I'd like to see a review of the 8 change before approval. > > -Rob > > On 25/03/16 03:06, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please, approve the backport of JDK-8150704 to JDK8. JAXP classes source fix >> applies cleanly after reshuffling. >> The only discrepancy is the test changes: >> In JDK9 the issue was tested by extending the functionality of existing JDK9 >> test: jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/TransformerTest.java >> Current test and test suite is absent in JDK8 and the added test case was >> backported to JDK8 as a standalone test application: >> jdk/test/javax/xml/jaxp/transform/8150704 - JDK8 webrev is provided. >> Also the cleanup changes of test code wasn't backported because tests are >> absent in JDK8. >> >> JTREG/JCK testing shows no failures with backported changes. >> >> Best Regards, >> Aleksej >> >> JBS: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150704 >> >> JDK8 webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8150704/8/00/ >> >> JDK9 changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/0fe7231b64a6 >> >> JDK9 Review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039272.html From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 19:45:33 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 22:45:33 +0300 Subject: RFR: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class In-Reply-To: <14CE4AC5-071F-474A-B48C-0B709286E86D@oracle.com> References: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> <14CE4AC5-071F-474A-B48C-0B709286E86D@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F5955D.5030009@oracle.com> Thank you for review Lance! Small question for clarification: Can I count your review for JDK8 changes too? Best Regards, Aleksej On 03/25/2016 08:46 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: > Looks OK Alejsej > > On Mar 24, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Aleksej Efimov > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Please, help to review the fix for JDK-8073872 [1]. In JDK9 this bug >> was fixed as part of sync with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The >> changes that fixed stack overflow issue are located in >> XmlSchemaGenerator class [3]. >> JDK9 change that needs review is the addition of regression test for >> this issue: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/9/00/ >> >> >> I will be requesting JDK8 approval for partially backporting the fix >> for this bug to 8u-dev. Can I also ask to review the JDK8 changes: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00/ >> >> Both JDK8/9 changes were tested with JCK/JTREG tests and no failures >> were observed. New test passes with the fix and successfully >> reproduces reported stack overflow on JDKs without the fix. >> >> Best Regards, >> Aleksej >> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 >> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 >> [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l3.2 > > > > Lance > Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 > Oracle Java Engineering > 1 Network Drive > Burlington, MA 01803 > Lance.Andersen at oracle.com > > > From lance.andersen at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 19:47:42 2016 From: lance.andersen at oracle.com (Lance Andersen) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 15:47:42 -0400 Subject: RFR: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class In-Reply-To: <56F5955D.5030009@oracle.com> References: <56F47A64.9000309@oracle.com> <14CE4AC5-071F-474A-B48C-0B709286E86D@oracle.com> <56F5955D.5030009@oracle.com> Message-ID: Yes I looked at everything Best Lance On Mar 25, 2016, at 3:45 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Thank you for review Lance! > Small question for clarification: Can I count your review for JDK8 changes too? > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > On 03/25/2016 08:46 PM, Lance Andersen wrote: >> Looks OK Alejsej >> >> On Mar 24, 2016, at 7:38 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please, help to review the fix for JDK-8073872 [1]. In JDK9 this bug was fixed as part of sync with upstream JAXWS project [2]. The changes that fixed stack overflow issue are located in XmlSchemaGenerator class [3]. >>> JDK9 change that needs review is the addition of regression test for this issue: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/9/00/ >>> >>> I will be requesting JDK8 approval for partially backporting the fix for this bug to 8u-dev. Can I also ask to review the JDK8 changes: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00/ >>> >>> Both JDK8/9 changes were tested with JCK/JTREG tests and no failures were observed. New test passes with the fix and successfully reproduces reported stack overflow on JDKs without the fix. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Aleksej >>> >>> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 >>> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150174 >>> [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jaxws/rev/ebff1bd3627a#l3.2 >> >> >> >> Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 >> Oracle Java Engineering >> 1 Network Drive >> Burlington, MA 01803 >> Lance.Andersen at oracle.com >> >> >> > Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037 Oracle Java Engineering 1 Network Drive Burlington, MA 01803 Lance.Andersen at oracle.com From abhi.saha at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 20:27:48 2016 From: abhi.saha at oracle.com (Abhi Saha) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:27:48 -0700 Subject: [8u102] Request for approval for bulk changes from 8u77 Message-ID: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> 8u77 has been released yesterday [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the changes into the jdk8u forest. webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u77-8u102.sync/webrev Thanks Abhijit [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html -- Java Platform Group Oracle Corporation. (408)276-7564 From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 20:31:52 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 20:31:52 +0000 Subject: [8u102] Request for approval for bulk changes from 8u77 In-Reply-To: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> References: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160325203152.GG4458@vimes> Approved. -Rob On 25/03/16 01:27, Abhi Saha wrote: > 8u77 has been released yesterday [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the > changes into the jdk8u forest. > > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u77-8u102.sync/webrev > > > Thanks > Abhijit > > > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html > > > -- > Java Platform Group > Oracle Corporation. > (408)276-7564 > From martinrb at google.com Fri Mar 25 20:41:48 2016 From: martinrb at google.com (Martin Buchholz) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:41:48 -0700 Subject: [8u102] Request for approval for bulk changes from 8u77 In-Reply-To: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> References: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Abhi Saha wrote: > 8u77 has been released yesterday [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the > changes into the jdk8u forest. > > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u77-8u102.sync/webrev That URL gave me 404. I'm also curious where u102 comes from - that seems to be in the far future. From abhi.saha at oracle.com Fri Mar 25 21:04:09 2016 From: abhi.saha at oracle.com (Abhi Saha) Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:04:09 -0700 Subject: [8u102] Request for approval for bulk changes from 8u77 In-Reply-To: References: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F5A7C9.8010000@oracle.com> Hi Martin, Please find my comments below. On 3/25/2016 1:41 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Abhi Saha wrote: >> 8u77 has been released yesterday [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the >> changes into the jdk8u forest. >> >> webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u77-8u102.sync/webrev > That URL gave me 404. As per process, we do remove the webrev directory once changes have been pushed into repository. Push request has been approved and 8u77 changes are in 8u Open repository so the webrev directory has been removed. > > I'm also curious where u102 comes from - that seems to be in the far future. Dalibor and other OpenJDK maintainer will comment more on this. Thanks Abhijit -- Java Platform Group Oracle Corporation. (408)276-7564 From huizhe.wang at oracle.com Sat Mar 26 22:25:23 2016 From: huizhe.wang at oracle.com (huizhe wang) Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2016 15:25:23 -0700 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8150704: XALAN: ERROR: 'No more DTM IDs are available' when transforming with lots of temporary result trees In-Reply-To: <56F5924E.2060605@oracle.com> References: <56F48118.40201@oracle.com> <20160325150757.GB2363@vimes> <56F5924E.2060605@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56F70C53.1090304@oracle.com> On 3/25/2016 12:32 PM, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi Rob, > Sure! > Adding corelibs-dev and Joe (JDK9 reviewer). > > Hi Joe, > Can you, please, review the backported changes: The source fix is > identical (except file paths), but regression test changes differs. Looks good, Aleksej. Best, Joe > > Best Regards, > Aleksej > > On 03/25/2016 06:07 PM, Rob McKenna wrote: >> Hi Aleksej, >> >> I'd like to see a review of the 8 change before approval. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 25/03/16 03:06, Aleksej Efimov wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Please, approve the backport of JDK-8150704 to JDK8. JAXP classes >>> source fix >>> applies cleanly after reshuffling. >>> The only discrepancy is the test changes: >>> In JDK9 the issue was tested by extending the functionality of >>> existing JDK9 >>> test: jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/TransformerTest.java >>> Current test and test suite is absent in JDK8 and the added test >>> case was >>> backported to JDK8 as a standalone test application: >>> jdk/test/javax/xml/jaxp/transform/8150704 - JDK8 webrev is provided. >>> Also the cleanup changes of test code wasn't backported because >>> tests are >>> absent in JDK8. >>> >>> JTREG/JCK testing shows no failures with backported changes. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Aleksej >>> >>> JBS: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150704 >>> >>> JDK8 webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8150704/8/00/ >>> >>> JDK9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jaxp/rev/0fe7231b64a6 >>> >>> JDK9 Review thread: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039272.html >>> > From artem.kosarev at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 04:36:16 2016 From: artem.kosarev at oracle.com (Artem Kosarev) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 07:36:16 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8048357: PKCS basic tests & backport of JDK-8143377: Test PKCS8Test.java fails Message-ID: <56F8B4C0.40601@oracle.com> Hello, Please approve the following backports: one enhancement + bug fix of regression tests to 8u-dev.: Both Enhancements and the bug fix were originally reviewed by Weijun Wang. Enhancement is applied clearly (no changes). "PKCS basic tests" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048357 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013022.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c071ebc7f3bf Bug fix has a very little change: we don't require removal of this test from Problem list, because it doesn't exist in Problem list for JDK8. Here is a webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8143377/webrev.00 Original fix in JDK 9: "Test PKCS8Test.java fails" https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143377 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013082.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/33fd40487d6d Thank you, Artem Kosarev. From abhijit.r.roy at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 10:01:59 2016 From: abhijit.r.roy at oracle.com (Abhijit Roy) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 03:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Request for approval: 8143647 In-Reply-To: <95056f50-bce1-4199-8f87-578d201f5866@default> References: <0a93d368-2c56-4b3a-9bbd-78565987525a@default> <95056f50-bce1-4199-8f87-578d201f5866@default> Message-ID: <1ddf07b0-79ac-4e93-9ec1-ec2402d60c03@default> Hi, May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8, and tested already. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to JDK8. As I do not have account for OPENJDK, David Buck will push this fix into JDK8u repository. JBS Link : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143647 JDK9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/73adc11fd50f Regards, Abhijit From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 10:10:17 2016 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 19:10:17 +0900 Subject: Request for approval: 8143647 In-Reply-To: <1ddf07b0-79ac-4e93-9ec1-ec2402d60c03@default> References: <0a93d368-2c56-4b3a-9bbd-78565987525a@default> <95056f50-bce1-4199-8f87-578d201f5866@default> <1ddf07b0-79ac-4e93-9ec1-ec2402d60c03@default> Message-ID: <22AF53F6-0F79-4DD2-AA4D-8B38896448EA@oracle.com> approved for backport to 8u-dev I?ll push this for you. Cheers, -Buck > On Mar 28, 2016, at 19:01, Abhijit Roy wrote: > > Hi, > > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8, and tested already. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to JDK8. As I do not have account for OPENJDK, David Buck will push this fix into JDK8u repository. > > > > JBS Link : > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143647 > > > > JDK9 changeset: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/73adc11fd50f > > > > > > Regards, > > Abhijit > > > > From abhijit.r.roy at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 10:10:37 2016 From: abhijit.r.roy at oracle.com (Abhijit Roy) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 03:10:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Request for approval: 8143647 In-Reply-To: <22AF53F6-0F79-4DD2-AA4D-8B38896448EA@oracle.com> References: <0a93d368-2c56-4b3a-9bbd-78565987525a@default> <95056f50-bce1-4199-8f87-578d201f5866@default> <1ddf07b0-79ac-4e93-9ec1-ec2402d60c03@default> <22AF53F6-0F79-4DD2-AA4D-8B38896448EA@oracle.com> Message-ID: <38fa59ed-1954-42cd-a769-ba62df935479@default> Thank you David. Regards, Abhijit -----Original Message----- From: David Buck Sent: Monday, March 28, 2016 03:40 PM To: Abhijit Roy Cc: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: Request for approval: 8143647 approved for backport to 8u-dev I?ll push this for you. Cheers, -Buck > On Mar 28, 2016, at 19:01, Abhijit Roy wrote: > > Hi, > > May I please have approval to backport this fix from JDK9 to JDK8. I have built the JDK8, and tested already. JDK9 fix applies cleanly to JDK8. As I do not have account for OPENJDK, David Buck will push this fix into JDK8u repository. > > > > JBS Link : > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143647 > > > > JDK9 changeset: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/langtools/rev/73adc11fd50f > > > > > > Regards, > > Abhijit > > > > From bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 12:16:17 2016 From: bhanu.prakash.gopularam at oracle.com (Bhanu prakash Gopularam) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:46:17 +0530 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval backport of JDK-8048830: Implement tests for new functionality provided in JEP 166 Message-ID: <56F92091.8090907@oracle.com> Hi All, Please approve direct backport of following bug to 8u-dev: Bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048830 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012507.html JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d84d9dc7b20f Here is the webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/bhanu/8146123/webrev.00/ Thanks, Bhanu From aleksej.efimov at oracle.com Mon Mar 28 14:41:00 2016 From: aleksej.efimov at oracle.com (Aleksej Efimov) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:41:00 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class Message-ID: <56F9427C.4070504@oracle.com> Hi, Please approve the backport of JDK-8073872 to JDK8u-dev. The fix differs from JDK9. It was already reviewed on core-libs-dev mail list as part of JDK9 review request. Changes were tested with JCK/JTREG JAXB test sets - no failures. Thanks, Aleksej Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 Review thread (JDK8 included): http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039692.html Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/9e73bdac39ec JDK8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00 From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Mon Mar 28 21:54:31 2016 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:54:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [8u102] Request for approval for bulk changes from 8u77 In-Reply-To: References: <56F59F44.5040100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <241929394.14726440.1459202071914.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> ----- Original Message ----- > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Abhi Saha wrote: > > 8u77 has been released yesterday [1]. Requesting approval to sync up the > > changes into the jdk8u forest. > > > > webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asaha/openJDK.8u77-8u102.sync/webrev > > That URL gave me 404. > > I'm also curious where u102 comes from - that seems to be in the far future. > My guess would be that all the numbers will have to move forward now, because u77 is higher than the expected April update would have been (u76). There's been two unscheduled updates (u73/u74 & u77) and the numbering only really gave room for one. 102 does seem a bit far ahead, because we were just wrapping up u82, but I guess we'll know when http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u82.html is updated. I can't wait for the new versioning in 9 to end all this mess :-) -- 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 shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 06:50:27 2016 From: shafi.s.ahmad at oracle.com (Shafi Ahmad) Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2016 23:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8150002: Check for the validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set Message-ID: <398e5171-be08-415f-bb89-be14c4829285@default> Hi All, Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev. JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150002 Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/55fe28454251 Jdk8u public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-March/005175.html Tested with jprt. Regards, Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 08:02:38 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:02:38 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval backport of JDK-8048830: Implement tests for new functionality provided in JEP 166 In-Reply-To: <56F92091.8090907@oracle.com> References: <56F92091.8090907@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56FA369E.2030206@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 28/03/2016 13:16, Bhanu prakash Gopularam wrote: > Hi All, > > Please approve direct backport of following bug to 8u-dev: > > Bug - https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048830 > > > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-July/012507.html > > JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/d84d9dc7b20f > > Here is the webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntv/bhanu/8146123/webrev.00/ > > > > Thanks, > > Bhanu > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 08:07:53 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:07:53 +0100 Subject: [8u] RFA for JDK-8150002: Check for the validity of oop before printing it in verify_remembered_set In-Reply-To: <398e5171-be08-415f-bb89-be14c4829285@default> References: <398e5171-be08-415f-bb89-be14c4829285@default> Message-ID: <56FA37D9.9020504@oracle.com> This bug report needs a noreg- label. Please add one. Approved. Regards, Sean. On 29/03/2016 07:50, Shafi Ahmad wrote: > Hi All, > > > > Could somebody approve this backport into jdk8u-dev. > > > > JDK9 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150002 > Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/55fe28454251 > > Jdk8u public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2016-March/005175.html > > > > Tested with jprt. > > > > Regards, > > Shafi From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 08:51:50 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:51:50 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8044772: TempDirTest.java still times out with -Xcomp In-Reply-To: <56EC3871.1000400@oracle.com> References: <542E8041.1010101@oracle.com> <56EC30B6.7030602@oracle.com> <56EC3871.1000400@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56FA4226.6000206@oracle.com> Looks fine to me. Reviewed. Regards, Sean. On 18/03/2016 17:18, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved subject to peer review. > > -Rob > > On 18/03/16 16:45, Alexander Vorobyev wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> I'd like approval for a JDK 8 backport of JDK-8044772 >> (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044772) >> >> The JDK 9 changeset does not apply clearly because of the difference in >> the changes history. Also there is no changes in ProblemList.txt in this >> backport because TempDirTest is not presented in this list for JDK 8. >> So here is webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~arusakov/avorobyev/webrev/ >> >> The changeset (except ProblemList.txt mentioned above) is absolutely the >> same as in original JDK 9 fix. >> >> JDK 9 Changeset: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/84065ccf6446 >> JDK 9 review thread: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2014-June/015066.html >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> Alexander >> >> >> From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 08:57:18 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 09:57:18 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8073872: Schemagen fails with StackOverflowError if element references containing class In-Reply-To: <56F9427C.4070504@oracle.com> References: <56F9427C.4070504@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56FA436E.6050903@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 28/03/2016 15:41, Aleksej Efimov wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve the backport of JDK-8073872 to JDK8u-dev. The fix > differs from JDK9. It was already reviewed on core-libs-dev mail list > as part of JDK9 review request. > Changes were tested with JCK/JTREG JAXB test sets - no failures. > > Thanks, > Aleksej > > Bug: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8073872 > > Review thread (JDK8 included): > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-March/039692.html > > > Changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/9e73bdac39ec > > JDK8 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aefimov/8073872/8/00 From sgehwolf at redhat.com Tue Mar 29 12:37:46 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 14:37:46 +0200 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 4858370: JDWP: Memory Leak: GlobalRefs never deleted when processing invokeMethod command Message-ID: <1459255066.3565.13.camel@redhat.com> Hi, Please approve the backport of JDK-4858370 to JDK 8. The patch for invoker.c is the same as for 9 (after path unshuffeling). Only the test has some slight modifications in order to set the JVM options for the debuggee since the test lib does not support the same things as in JDK 9. I'd need somebody to sponsor this change. Bug:?https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4858370 webrev:?http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/webrev.jdk8.01/ hg-export: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/JDK-4858370-jdk8-jdk.export.patch Original JDK 9 webrev that got pushed: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/webrev.02/ JDK 9 review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-March/019155.html Please let me know if there are questions! Thanks, Severin From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 12:59:00 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 13:59:00 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport of JDK-8048357: PKCS basic tests & backport of JDK-8143377: Test PKCS8Test.java fails In-Reply-To: <56F8B4C0.40601@oracle.com> References: <56F8B4C0.40601@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160329125900.GA23370@vimes> Approved. -Rob On 28/03/16 07:36, Artem Kosarev wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve the following backports: one enhancement + bug fix of > regression tests to 8u-dev.: > > Both Enhancements and the bug fix were originally reviewed by Weijun Wang. > > Enhancement is applied clearly (no changes). > > "PKCS basic tests" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8048357 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013022.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/c071ebc7f3bf > > > Bug fix has a very little change: we don't require removal of this test from > Problem list, because it doesn't exist in Problem list for JDK8. > Here is a webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8143377/webrev.00 > > > Original fix in JDK 9: > > "Test PKCS8Test.java fails" > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143377 > Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013082.html > > JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/33fd40487d6d > > Thank you, > Artem Kosarev. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 13:04:41 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 14:04:41 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 4858370: JDWP: Memory Leak: GlobalRefs never deleted when processing invokeMethod command In-Reply-To: <1459255066.3565.13.camel@redhat.com> References: <1459255066.3565.13.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20160329130441.GB23370@vimes> Approved. -Rob On 29/03/16 02:37, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > Hi, > > Please approve the backport of JDK-4858370 to JDK 8. The patch for > invoker.c is the same as for 9 (after path unshuffeling). Only the test > has some slight modifications in order to set the JVM options for the > debuggee since the test lib does not support the same things as in JDK > 9. I'd need somebody to sponsor this change. > > Bug:?https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4858370 > webrev:?http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/webrev.jdk8.01/ > hg-export: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/JDK-4858370-jdk8-jdk.export.patch > > Original JDK 9 webrev that got pushed: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/webrev.02/ > > JDK 9 review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-March/019155.html > > Please let me know if there are questions! > > Thanks, > Severin From sgehwolf at redhat.com Tue Mar 29 13:17:24 2016 From: sgehwolf at redhat.com (Severin Gehwolf) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 15:17:24 +0200 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 4858370: JDWP: Memory Leak: GlobalRefs never deleted when processing invokeMethod command In-Reply-To: <20160329130441.GB23370@vimes> References: <1459255066.3565.13.camel@redhat.com> <20160329130441.GB23370@vimes> Message-ID: <1459257444.3565.18.camel@redhat.com> On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 14:04 +0100, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved. > > ????-Rob Thanks, Rob! Cheers, Severin > On 29/03/16 02:37, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Please approve the backport of JDK-4858370 to JDK 8. The patch for > > invoker.c is the same as for 9 (after path unshuffeling). Only the > > test > > has some slight modifications in order to set the JVM options for > > the > > debuggee since the test lib does not support the same things as in > > JDK > > 9. I'd need somebody to sponsor this change. > > > > Bug:?https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4858370 > > webrev:?http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/we > > brev.jdk8.01/ > > hg-export: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370 > > /JDK-4858370-jdk8-jdk.export.patch > > > > Original JDK 9 webrev that got pushed: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sgehwolf/webrevs/JDK-4858370/webrev.02/ > > > > JDK 9 review thread: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2016-Marc > > h/019155.html > > > > Please let me know if there are questions! > > > > Thanks, > > Severin From sean.coffey at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 18:20:37 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 19:20:37 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8072463: Remove requirement that AKID and SKID have to match when building certificate chain Message-ID: <56FAC775.4050506@oracle.com> Looking for (retrospective) approval to push this into jdk8u-dev. I thought I had approval obtained already. Changes import cleanly. Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072463 jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c8e7b9c8b2fd Review thread : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013015.html As per JDK 9 review, a new test has been added to the closed area since it depends on certificates contributed by the submitter. -- Regards, Sean. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 20:22:58 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 21:22:58 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval : 8072463: Remove requirement that AKID and SKID have to match when building certificate chain In-Reply-To: <56FAC775.4050506@oracle.com> References: <56FAC775.4050506@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20160329202258.GC2567@vimes> Approved -Rob On 29/03/16 07:20, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Looking for (retrospective) approval to push this into jdk8u-dev. I thought > I had approval obtained already. Changes import cleanly. > > Bug ID : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8072463 > jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/c8e7b9c8b2fd > Review thread : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2015-November/013015.html > > As per JDK 9 review, a new test has been added to the closed area since it > depends on certificates contributed by the submitter. > > -- > Regards, > Sean. > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Mar 29 22:49:07 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 23:49:07 +0100 Subject: [8u communication] Adjustment of OpenJDK 8u release versions Message-ID: <20160329224907.GD2567@vimes> With the release of JDK 8u77 [0], the version numbers of the current and future OpenJDK 8u releases need to be adjusted. To avoid confusion with any versions that were already in development, I'd like to propose the following: * The next release of this Project to be called 8u92, instead of 8u76 * The release after that release to be called 8u102, instead of 8u82 Both proposals are open for discussion for one week until April 5th. Regards, -Rob [0] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alert-cve-2016-0636-2949497.html From doko at ubuntu.com Tue Mar 29 23:20:14 2016 From: doko at ubuntu.com (Matthias Klose) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:20:14 +0200 Subject: [8u communication] Adjustment of OpenJDK 8u release versions In-Reply-To: <20160329224907.GD2567@vimes> References: <20160329224907.GD2567@vimes> Message-ID: <56FB0DAE.2030700@ubuntu.com> On 30.03.2016 00:49, Rob McKenna wrote: > With the release of JDK 8u77 [0], the version numbers of the current and future OpenJDK 8u releases need to be adjusted. > > To avoid confusion with any versions that were already in development, I'd like to propose the following: > > * The next release of this Project to be called 8u92, instead of 8u76 > * The release after that release to be called 8u102, instead of 8u82 > > Both proposals are open for discussion for one week until April 5th. Regards, well, the 8u102 tag is already used, so why discuss it? Is there a documented rationale why to jump from 8u76 to 8u92? afaics these were just +4 updates in the past, not +16. Matthias From svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com Wed Mar 30 14:49:46 2016 From: svetlana.nikandrova at oracle.com (Svetlana Nikandrova) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 17:49:46 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8151731: Add new jtreg keyword to jdk 8 In-Reply-To: <56E6D165.5070309@oracle.com> References: <56E6CC84.50400@oracle.com> <56E6D165.5070309@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56FBE78A.7000303@oracle.com> Sean, yes, it makes sense as this standalone change for us. We have a list of tests from jdk 9 in progress of being backported to jdk 8. I believe it will reduce cost of backporting and future maintenance to keep code as close to jdk 9 as possible. Therefor this keywords will allow us to keep tests with only this keyword difference as direct backports. As for 8078334 - we plan to do marking of remaining test after we finish with tests' backports. About a OpenJDK wiki I also couldn't find info except of mail threads and JBS bugs. Could you please refer me to someone who can help with doc's update? Thank you, Svetlana On 14.03.2016 17:57, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Svetlana, does it make sense to introduce such keywords without > modifying the tests that need them ? i.e. should 8078334 be backported ? > > It would be nice to get such keywords documented in a OpenJDK wiki > somewhere. (if one exists, please add to master record) I see a > reference to some mail threads in the master record but that's not a > substitute for docs IMO. > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 14/03/16 14:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >> Hello, >> >> please approve 2 additional jtreg keywords used in jdk 9: >> "intermittent" and "randomness". >> This test's marking can be useful by itself and will simplify tests' >> and test's fixes backporting. >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151731 >> >> webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8151731/webrev.00/ >> >> >> Thank you, >> Svetlana >> > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 30 14:57:12 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:57:12 +0100 Subject: [8u communication] Adjustment of OpenJDK 8u release versions In-Reply-To: <56FB0DAE.2030700@ubuntu.com> References: <20160329224907.GD2567@vimes> <56FB0DAE.2030700@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: <20160330145712.GC3516@vimes> As per the previous mail we jumped all the way to 8u102 as we wished "To avoid confusion with any versions that were already in development". As Andrew Hughes correctly pointed out on an earlier thread, the version numbers planned for future releases had to change as a consequence of recent releases. Should anyone raise a substantial objection to the proposed changes we can always update the tags. Given the nature of the JDK 8u77 release, and the fact that there are releases in development that need to be associated with some version number in the JBS infrastructure, we're tentatively proceeding with plan A for now however. -Rob On 30/03/16 01:20, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 30.03.2016 00:49, Rob McKenna wrote: > >With the release of JDK 8u77 [0], the version numbers of the current and future OpenJDK 8u releases need to be adjusted. > > > >To avoid confusion with any versions that were already in development, I'd like to propose the following: > > > > * The next release of this Project to be called 8u92, instead of 8u76 > > * The release after that release to be called 8u102, instead of 8u82 > > > >Both proposals are open for discussion for one week until April 5th. Regards, > > well, the 8u102 tag is already used, so why discuss it? Is there a > documented rationale why to jump from 8u76 to 8u92? afaics these were just > +4 updates in the past, not +16. > > Matthias > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Mar 30 15:35:45 2016 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:35:45 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8068427: Hashtable deserialization reconstitutes table with wrong capacity In-Reply-To: <20160323155559.GB4222@vimes> References: <20160323145119.GC2372@vimes> <20160323155559.GB4222@vimes> Message-ID: <20160330153545.GE3516@vimes> That JCK issue has been resolved so re-requesting approval! -Rob On 23/03/16 03:55, Rob McKenna wrote: > So this fix exposes a problem in a JCK test. I'll update the alias when its resolved. > > -Rob > > On 23/03/16 02:51, Rob McKenna wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > Looking for approval for this clean backport: > > > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068427 > > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e0ff6048ec5 > > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030557.html > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Rob > > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Mar 30 15:38:14 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 16:38:14 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8068427: Hashtable deserialization reconstitutes table with wrong capacity In-Reply-To: <20160330153545.GE3516@vimes> References: <20160323145119.GC2372@vimes> <20160323155559.GB4222@vimes> <20160330153545.GE3516@vimes> Message-ID: <56FBF2E6.6070302@oracle.com> Approved. Regards, Sean. On 30/03/16 16:35, Rob McKenna wrote: > That JCK issue has been resolved so re-requesting approval! > > -Rob > > On 23/03/16 03:55, Rob McKenna wrote: >> So this fix exposes a problem in a JCK test. I'll update the alias when its resolved. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 23/03/16 02:51, Rob McKenna wrote: >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Looking for approval for this clean backport: >>> >>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8068427 >>> JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/3e0ff6048ec5 >>> Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-January/030557.html >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> -Rob >>> From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 31 09:18:38 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:18:38 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval for JDK-8151731: Add new jtreg keyword to jdk 8 In-Reply-To: <56FBE78A.7000303@oracle.com> References: <56E6CC84.50400@oracle.com> <56E6D165.5070309@oracle.com> <56FBE78A.7000303@oracle.com> Message-ID: <56FCEB6E.9070703@oracle.com> Hi Svetlana, comments inline.. On 30/03/2016 15:49, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: > Sean, > > yes, it makes sense as this standalone change for us. We have a list > of tests from jdk 9 in progress of being backported to jdk 8. I > believe it will reduce cost of backporting and future maintenance to > keep code as close to jdk 9 as possible. > Therefor this keywords will allow us to keep tests with only this > keyword difference as direct backports. > As for 8078334 - we plan to do marking of remaining test after we > finish with tests' backports. OK - I've no problem with the new keyword being introduced. I just thought it would made sense to introduce it at the same time as when the 8078334 changeset[1] is backported. If you want to backport it separately, consider your 8151731 request approved for jdk8u-dev. > > About a OpenJDK wiki I also couldn't find info except of mail threads > and JBS bugs. Could you please refer me to someone who can help with > doc's update? I think we should document these keywords once and for all. I've asked Joe Darcy in the past but I think he seems happy to capture such info in emails only [2] [3] - something I don't agree with. Please contact Jon Gibbons about a suggestion to update the jtreg docs[4] with these keywords and their usage. regards, Sean. [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/110f7f35760f [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-March/001991.html [3] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk9-dev/2015-April/002164.html [4] http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/tag-spec.html > > Thank you, > Svetlana > > On 14.03.2016 17:57, Se?n Coffey wrote: >> Svetlana, does it make sense to introduce such keywords without >> modifying the tests that need them ? i.e. should 8078334 be backported ? >> >> It would be nice to get such keywords documented in a OpenJDK wiki >> somewhere. (if one exists, please add to master record) I see a >> reference to some mail threads in the master record but that's not a >> substitute for docs IMO. >> >> Regards, >> Sean. >> >> On 14/03/16 14:36, Svetlana Nikandrova wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> please approve 2 additional jtreg keywords used in jdk 9: >>> "intermittent" and "randomness". >>> This test's marking can be useful by itself and will simplify tests' >>> and test's fixes backporting. >>> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8151731 >>> >>> webrev: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~msolovie/8151731/webrev.00/ >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Svetlana >>> >> > From rasbold at google.com Thu Mar 31 17:18:12 2016 From: rasbold at google.com (Chuck Rasbold) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:18:12 -0700 Subject: Request for approval: 8150780 Repeated offer and remove on ConcurrentLinkedQueue lead to an OutOfMemoryError In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Approved. On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: > I rarely do jdk8 backports, but excessive interest on > concurrency-interest guilted me into doing this one. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150780 > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk8/backport-JDK-8054446/ > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Mar 31 20:04:39 2016 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:04:39 +0100 Subject: Request for approval: 8150780 Repeated offer and remove on ConcurrentLinkedQueue lead to an OutOfMemoryError In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56FD82D7.7020504@oracle.com> Looks like I missed this one. Approved for jdk8u-dev. Regards, Sean. On 31/03/2016 18:18, Chuck Rasbold wrote: > Approved. > > On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Martin Buchholz > wrote: > >> I rarely do jdk8 backports, but excessive interest on >> concurrency-interest guilted me into doing this one. >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8150780 >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk8/backport-JDK-8054446/ >>