[10] RFR: 8185164: GetOwnedMonitorInfo() returns incorrect owned monitor

[Yasumasa Suenaga]

2017-08-08 7:16 GMT+09:00 serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
<serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>:
>
>
> On 8/7/17 10:11, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>
>> On 8/7/17 10:05, serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Yasumasa,
>>>
>>> It is good.
>>
>>
>> I forgot about the line that is not needed in the test:
>>
>>   29  * @modules jdk.jdi
>>
>> I will remove it before pushing.
>
>
> Pushed.

Thanks everyone!

I want to backport this change to older releases (9, 8) .
Can I add 9-bp and 8-bp label to JBS?

I will send backport request to 8u if I can.


Yasumasa


> Thanks,
> Serguei
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Serguei
>>
>>> I will sponsor the fix.
>>> If I understand correctly, David is also Ok with the fix.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Serguei
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/7/17 01:54, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Serguei, David,
>>>>
>>>> I uploaded webrev which includes @summary update and 4 indent:
>>>>
>>>>    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.05/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Could you review and be a sponsor for it?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yasumasa
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2017-08-07 17:35 GMT+09:00 serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com
>>>> <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/6/17 21:50, David Holmes wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Yasumasa,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/08/2017 2:02 PM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi David,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I uploaded new webrev:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ysuenaga/JDK-8185164/webrev.04/
>>>>>
>>>>> . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Style query: do we do indent of 2 or 4 in hotspot C code tests ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fixed in C code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was asking a question - I'm not sure if we use 2 or 4. Now looking
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> some other JVMTI tests they seem to use 4. I didn't do an exhaustive
>>>>>> check
>>>>>> to see if there is a predominant style.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The indent was always 4 even for the nsk.jvmti tests.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Serguei
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> David
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>