RFR: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO

[Yasumasa Suenaga]

Hi David,

Sorry for my incorrect mail thread.

For this issue, I already got two reviewers:

http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020968.html

http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020973.html


Yasumasa


2017-02-13 10:09 GMT+09:00 David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>:

> Hi Yasumasa,
>
> Please don't start new email threads on the same topic just to add a cc.
> I've added to the existing thread and that is now missed on this new one!
> It makes it hard to track comments, reviews and outstanding issues.
> serviceability-dev was the correct mailing list for this change, there was
> no need to also send to hotspot-dev.
>
> On 11/02/2017 12:16 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
>
>> On 10/02/17 14:15, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote:
>>
>>> We need one or more reviewer. Could you review it?
>>>
>>
>> We don't need another reviewer.  We need a sponsor to put it
>> through JPRT.
>>
>
> For hotspot changes we do prefer at least 2 reviews (though only 1 need be
> a Reviewer). The rules are not clearly documented anywhere that I can see.
> Based on this:
>
> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html
>
> "Changeset pushes before the Feature Complete require at least one
> Reviewer; pushes after the Feature Complete require at least two Reviewers.
> In either case, the more the merrier. Some teams may require more
> Reviewers. Check with members of the Project."
>
> we need two Reviewers after FC, but I don't think anyone has been aware of
> and enforcing that!
>
> David
> -----
>
>
> Andrew.
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/attachments/20170213/22ce9781/attachment.html>