From nikita.j.jain at oracle.com Wed Feb 1 14:25:03 2017 From: nikita.j.jain at oracle.com (Nikita Jain) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 06:25:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u] RFA for backport of JDK-8166248: tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java fails on Win32: Could not reserve enough space Message-ID: <77c033be-2704-495d-a7b3-95f3331fd1b2@default> Hi All, Please approve this trivial backport. The patch applies successfully, except the original patch has extra Bug id mention (8151901- which we are not backporting). Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166248 Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7f6aa74d680f Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-September/043687.html Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8166248/webrev.00/ Tested with Jtreg and Jprt. Thanks, Nikita Jain From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 1 17:11:53 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 17:11:53 +0000 Subject: [8u] RFA for backport of JDK-8166248: tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java fails on Win32: Could not reserve enough space In-Reply-To: <77c033be-2704-495d-a7b3-95f3331fd1b2@default> References: <77c033be-2704-495d-a7b3-95f3331fd1b2@default> Message-ID: <20170201171153.GA2829@vimes> Approved -Rob On 01/02/17 06:25, Nikita Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > Please approve this trivial backport. > The patch applies successfully, except the original patch has extra Bug id mention (8151901- which we are not backporting). > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166248 > Original patch pushed to 9: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/7f6aa74d680f > Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2016-September/043687.html > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8166248/webrev.00/ > > Tested with Jtreg and Jprt. > > Thanks, > Nikita Jain From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 1 18:06:52 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 18:06:52 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] request for approval : 8173581: performance regression in com/sun/crypto/provider/OutputFeedback.java Message-ID: <589223BC.4030100@oracle.com> Seeking to port this simple change to jdk8u-dev. Applies cleanly post path unshuffling. code review : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2017-January/015531.html jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/69342000c9a9 bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173581 -- Regards, Sean. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 1 18:33:23 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2017 18:33:23 +0000 Subject: [jdk8u-dev] request for approval : 8173581: performance regression in com/sun/crypto/provider/OutputFeedback.java In-Reply-To: <589223BC.4030100@oracle.com> References: <589223BC.4030100@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170201183323.GG2829@vimes> Approved -Rob On 01/02/17 06:06, Se?n Coffey wrote: > Seeking to port this simple change to jdk8u-dev. Applies cleanly post path > unshuffling. > > code review : > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/2017-January/015531.html > jdk 9 changeset : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/jdk/rev/69342000c9a9 > bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173581 > > -- > Regards, > Sean. > From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 2 02:05:33 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:05:33 +0900 Subject: [8u] 8087342: crash in klassItable_initialize_itable_for_interface Message-ID: <806ab35a-c8b7-1a81-3e13-cd84f46855f3@oracle.com> Hi! Please approve the following backport to 8u-dev bug report: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8087342 JDK 9 push: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/5e09f372116b jdk 8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8087342_01/ jdk 8 backport code review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-January/022463.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022487.html Cheers, -Buck From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 2 09:37:11 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 09:37:11 +0000 Subject: [8u] 8087342: crash in klassItable_initialize_itable_for_interface In-Reply-To: <806ab35a-c8b7-1a81-3e13-cd84f46855f3@oracle.com> References: <806ab35a-c8b7-1a81-3e13-cd84f46855f3@oracle.com> Message-ID: Approved. regards, Sean. On 02/02/2017 02:05, David Buck wrote: > Hi! > > Please approve the following backport to 8u-dev > > bug report: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8087342 > > JDK 9 push: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/5e09f372116b > > jdk 8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dbuck/8087342_01/ > > jdk 8 backport code review: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-January/022463.html > > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022487.html > > > Cheers, > -Buck From nikita.j.jain at oracle.com Thu Feb 2 13:07:09 2017 From: nikita.j.jain at oracle.com (Nikita Jain) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 05:07:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation In-Reply-To: <58863A7D.9050008@oracle.com> References: <2f0a6aec-71b8-42cd-88d6-94f12c31acd4@default> <3441b67c-6a36-41d7-628c-f076ea4fa92e@oracle.com> <4843f035-46dc-4fbc-8e54-15e3e817afed@default> <58863A7D.9050008@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Sean, ? > -tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java????????????????????????????????? solaris-all, macosx-all As suggested backport is done and waiting for push ? >+ sun/security/pkcs11/rsa/TestKeyPairGenerator.java???????????? ??solaris-sparcv9 Done, modified as solaris-all ? >+ sun/security/tools/jarsigner/TsacertOptionTest.java???????????? linux-x64, macosx-x64 : As suggested backported the fix and hence now not adding into the ProblemList.txt ? Updated the webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.02/ ? Thanks, Nikita Jain ? From: Se?n Coffey Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 PM To: Ivan Gerasimov ; Nikita Jain ; jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net Subject: Re: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation ? Nikita, a few comments. The Pack200Test.java test was probably stabilized via the JDK-8166248 test fix. It stipulates that the test run on a with max memory > 4g - That might be useful for JDK 8u also. + # 8129560 + sun/security/pkcs11/rsa/TestKeyPairGenerator.java?????????????? solaris-sparcv9 This seems applicable to solaris x64 also, Should the arch be solaris-all ? Would it be better to port the 1 line fix rather than add this to the exclude list ? + # 8168374, 8130041 + sun/security/tools/jarsigner/TsacertOptionTest.java???????????? linux-x64, macosx-x64 8168374 is a JDK 9 (only) modules issue. Please remove the id reference. 813004 [1] is a simple enough backport. I'd recommend porting that to 8u-dev. For new tests & bug IDs being added to the problem list, do you plan to open a backport reference for test fixes that should be ported ? [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/78fcb2e094db Regards, Sean. On 23/01/17 10:44, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: Thanks Nikita! The fix now looks good to me. Please get another review from a jdk8u-dev Reviewer before pushing it. With kind regards, Ivan On 23.01.2017 11:19, Nikita Jain wrote: Hi All, Updated the webrev. May I have a reviewer to review this: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.01/ HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erpatil/8171151/webrev.01/" Thank you Ivan for looking into this, created new bugs for the same. Thanks, Nikita Jain *From:*Ivan Gerasimov *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:43 AM *To:* Nikita Jain HYPERLINK "mailto:nikita.j.jain at oracle.com"; HYPERLINK "mailto:jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net"jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net *Subject:* Re: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation Hi Nikita! Thanks for working on this! Reducing the noise from failing tests should greatly help to focus on the important failures. Your patch looks good in general. A couple of comments: 1) ?223 # 8158274 ?224 java/nio/file/Files/probeContentType/Basic.java solaris-x64 The bug JDK-8158274 was about Solaris Sparc and is now closed with "Won't fix" resolution. If the test is going to be fixed, then a new bug should be filed. 2) ?283 # 8043951 ?284 sun/security/pkcs11/MessageDigest/TestCloning.java solaris-x64 The bug JDK-8043951 was closed as "Won't fix". If we're going to fix the test, either the bug should be reopened, or a new bug should be filed. Please not that I'm not a Reviewer, so you'll need to get an approval from one. With kind regards, Ivan On 18.01.2017 16:47, Nikita Jain wrote: ??? Hi All, ??? Please review this fix for JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation ??? Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171151 ??? JDK8u Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.00/ ??? HYPERLINK "http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erpatil/8171151/webrev.00/" ??? Testing: Passes JPRT. ????? ??? -------------- ??? Summary ??? Test cases inserted ??? -> New test failures for JDK8u-dev have been added in the list with their associated bug id. ??? -> 8171208, The bug has been closed because of the Infra issue. However, its reference is used here just to track the INFRA bug id. ??? java/net/CookieHandler/CookieManagerTest.java ??? java/net/HttpURLConnection/UnmodifiableMaps.java ??? sun/net/www/protocol/http/B6299712.java ??? Test cases updated/deleted ??? -> Removing the test as per the bug id 8027973 [bug is fixed] ??? javax/xml/jaxp/transform/jdk8004476/XSLTExFuncTest.java ????? ??? -> Removing the test as per the bug id 7052625 [change is backported] ??? com/sun/net/httpserver/bugs/6725892/Test.java ??? -> Removing the test as per the bug id 7148829 [No more failure seen, reopen if seen again] ??? sun/net/InetAddress/nameservice/simple/CacheTest.java ??? sun/net/InetAddress/nameservice/simple/DefaultCaching.java ??? -> The test was seen as failure in solaris_x64 and solaris_sparcv9 also. Platform, Bug id has also been added for the same. ??? java/net/MulticastSocket/SetLoopbackMode.java ????? ??? -> The test was seen as failure in solaris_x64. Platform, Bug id has also been added for the same. ??? java/net/MulticastSocket/Test.java ??? -> Updating bug id from (JDK-7157786 to JDK-8026976), as '7157786' is closed as duplicate ??? sun/security/pkcs11/ec/TestKeyFactory.java ??? -> Removing the test as per the bug id 6988842 [bug is fixed but entry is not removed from the ProblemList.txt] ??? sun/security/pkcs11/Secmod/AddPrivateKey.java ??? sun/security/pkcs11/ec/ReadCertificates.java ??? sun/security/pkcs11/ec/ReadPKCS12.java ??? -> According to this bug id: 6988842, test is not falling on solaris-all. The test was seen as failure on linux_i586 and linux_x64. Hence, the bug id and affected platform has been updated. ??? sun/security/pkcs11/sslecc/ClientJSSEServerJSSE.java ??? -> Removing these tests as per the comment in Bug 7143279. [No failure reported since 2013/06. Reopen if seen again] ??? tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java ??? tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java ??? -> The test was seen as failure in windows _all. Platform, Bug id has also been added for the same. ??? tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java ??? Thanks, ??? Nikita Jain ? ? From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 08:07:07 2017 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:07:07 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8153134: Infinite loop in handle_wrong_method in jmod Message-ID: Hello, Please, approve this backport of JDK-8153134 to JDK8u-dev. The fix applies mostly cleanly. Tested with jprt. Regards, Vladimir JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153134 JDK8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8153134/webrev.00/ JDK9 changesets: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f482f393222d From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 09:06:41 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 09:06:41 +0000 Subject: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation In-Reply-To: References: <2f0a6aec-71b8-42cd-88d6-94f12c31acd4@default> <3441b67c-6a36-41d7-628c-f076ea4fa92e@oracle.com> <4843f035-46dc-4fbc-8e54-15e3e817afed@default> <58863A7D.9050008@oracle.com> Message-ID: This looks ok Nikita. You've opened some new bug IDs to record some of these failures. I think it would have been better to either open backports of JDK 9 issues or link them to older JBS issues where applicable. e.g. you've logged JDK-8173182 even though other bugs with same issue exist on sun/security/pkcs11/MessageDigest/TestCloning.java - In a related bug we have a clear reason as to why the issue is not a JDK issue [1]. Opening new bugs adds a tail to capturing bug history. We can clean this up post your push. For now, the updated ProblemList looks ok. regards, Sean. [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043951?focusedCommentId=14037458&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14037458 On 02/02/2017 13:07, Nikita Jain wrote: > > Hi Sean, > > > -tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java solaris-all, macosx-all > > As suggested backport is done and waiting for push > > >+ sun/security/pkcs11/rsa/TestKeyPairGenerator.java solaris-sparcv9 > > Done, modified as solaris-all > > >+ sun/security/tools/jarsigner/TsacertOptionTest.java linux-x64, > macosx-x64 : > > As suggested backported the fix and hence now not adding into the > ProblemList.txt > > Updated the webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.02/ > > > Thanks, > > Nikita Jain > > *From:*Se?n Coffey > *Sent:* Monday, January 23, 2017 10:47 PM > *To:* Ivan Gerasimov ; Nikita Jain > ; jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > *Subject:* Re: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation > > Nikita, > > a few comments. > > The Pack200Test.java test was probably stabilized via the JDK-8166248 > test fix. It stipulates that the test run on a with max memory > 4g - > That might be useful for JDK 8u also. > > > *+ # 8129560* > > *+ sun/security/pkcs11/rsa/TestKeyPairGenerator.java > solaris-sparcv9* > > This seems applicable to solaris x64 also, Should the arch be > solaris-all ? > > Would it be better to port the 1 line fix rather than add this to the > exclude list ? > > > *+ # 8168374, 8130041* > > *+ sun/security/tools/jarsigner/TsacertOptionTest.java > linux-x64, macosx-x64* > > 8168374 is a JDK 9 (only) modules issue. Please remove the id reference. > 813004 [1] is a simple enough backport. I'd recommend porting that to > 8u-dev. > > For new tests & bug IDs being added to the problem list, do you plan > to open a backport reference for test fixes that should be ported ? > > [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/78fcb2e094db > > Regards, > Sean. > > On 23/01/17 10:44, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: > > Thanks Nikita! > > The fix now looks good to me. > Please get another review from a jdk8u-dev Reviewer before pushing > it. > > With kind regards, > Ivan > > On 23.01.2017 11:19, Nikita Jain wrote: > > > Hi All, > > Updated the webrev. May I have a reviewer to review this: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.01/ > > > > > Thank you Ivan for looking into this, created new bugs for the > same. > > > Thanks, > > Nikita Jain > > *From:*Ivan Gerasimov > *Sent:* Sunday, January 22, 2017 3:43 AM > *To:* Nikita Jain > ; jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net > > *Subject:* Re: RFR: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updation > > Hi Nikita! > > Thanks for working on this! > Reducing the noise from failing tests should greatly help to > focus on the important failures. > > Your patch looks good in general. > > A couple of comments: > 1) > 223 # 8158274 > 224 java/nio/file/Files/probeContentType/Basic.java solaris-x64 > > The bug JDK-8158274 was about Solaris Sparc and is now closed > with "Won't fix" resolution. > If the test is going to be fixed, then a new bug should be filed. > > 2) > 283 # 8043951 > 284 sun/security/pkcs11/MessageDigest/TestCloning.java > solaris-x64 > > The bug JDK-8043951 was closed as "Won't fix". > If we're going to fix the test, either the bug should be > reopened, or a new bug should be filed. > > > Please not that I'm not a Reviewer, so you'll need to get an > approval from one. > > With kind regards, > Ivan > > On 18.01.2017 16:47, Nikita Jain wrote: > > Hi All, > > Please review this fix for JDK-8171151 - JDK8u > ProblemList.txt Updation > > Bug:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171151 > > JDK8u > Webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.00/ > > > > > Testing: Passes JPRT. > > > -------------- > > Summary > > Test cases inserted > > -> New test failures for JDK8u-dev have been added in the > list with their associated bug id. > > -> 8171208, The bug has been closed because of the Infra > issue. However, its reference is used here just to track the > INFRA bug id. > > java/net/CookieHandler/CookieManagerTest.java > > java/net/HttpURLConnection/UnmodifiableMaps.java > > sun/net/www/protocol/http/B6299712.java > > Test cases updated/deleted > > -> Removing the test as per the bug id 8027973 [bug is fixed] > > javax/xml/jaxp/transform/jdk8004476/XSLTExFuncTest.java > > > -> Removing the test as per the bug id 7052625 [change is > backported] > > com/sun/net/httpserver/bugs/6725892/Test.java > > -> Removing the test as per the bug id 7148829 [No more > failure seen, reopen if seen again] > > sun/net/InetAddress/nameservice/simple/CacheTest.java > > sun/net/InetAddress/nameservice/simple/DefaultCaching.java > > -> The test was seen as failure in solaris_x64 and > solaris_sparcv9 also. Platform, Bug id has also been added for > the same. > > java/net/MulticastSocket/SetLoopbackMode.java > > > -> The test was seen as failure in solaris_x64. Platform, > Bug id has also been added for the same. > > java/net/MulticastSocket/Test.java > > -> Updating bug id from (JDK-7157786 to JDK-8026976), as > '7157786' is closed as duplicate > > sun/security/pkcs11/ec/TestKeyFactory.java > > -> Removing the test as per the bug id 6988842 [bug is > fixed but entry is not removed from the ProblemList.txt] > > sun/security/pkcs11/Secmod/AddPrivateKey.java > > sun/security/pkcs11/ec/ReadCertificates.java > > sun/security/pkcs11/ec/ReadPKCS12.java > > -> According to this bug id: 6988842, test is not falling > on solaris-all. The test was seen as failure on linux_i586 and > linux_x64. Hence, the bug id and affected platform has been > updated. > > sun/security/pkcs11/sslecc/ClientJSSEServerJSSE.java > > -> Removing these tests as per the comment in Bug 7143279. > [No failure reported since 2013/06. Reopen if seen again] > > tools/pack200/CommandLineTests.java > > tools/pack200/Pack200Test.java > > -> The test was seen as failure in windows _all. Platform, > Bug id has also been added for the same. > > tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java > > Thanks, > > Nikita Jain > From vaibhavv at us.ibm.com Mon Feb 6 10:14:41 2017 From: vaibhavv at us.ibm.com (Vaibhav Vaingankar) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:44:41 +0530 Subject: java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x Message-ID: Hello, We are building HBase source code using OpenJDK 8 on s390x platform, we encountered some testcase failures related to bit unalignment. We discovered that java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x. However similar issue had reported on ppc and was resolved by adding ppc support in ByteArrayAccess.java and ByteArrayAccess.java, following is the changeset link: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/8d16f74380a7 Referring to above changeset we added s390x support in both the classes. The resultant JDK could resolve the testcase failure. Let me know how to add s390x support to the OpenJDK 8 source. Any suggestion are appreciated. Thanks and regards. Vaibhav Vaingankar From tuure.laurinolli at vaisala.com Mon Feb 6 10:57:05 2017 From: tuure.laurinolli at vaisala.com (tuure.laurinolli at vaisala.com) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 10:57:05 +0000 Subject: Misleading commentary on 8160347 Message-ID: <365bb9d5e584461a9db7dcc35111361e@HEL-EXCH-02.corp.vaisala.com> Hi, The commentary on https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160347 is a bit misleading. The comment says that the issue could not be reproduced, but it seems to me that the attached output in the comment does reproduce the issue. From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 10:57:51 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 10:57:51 +0000 Subject: java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <589856AF.8070802@oracle.com> Vaibhav, you'll find details on how to submit OpenJDK contributions here[1]. You or a colleague who has access to the Java Bug System[2] can open a bug. A patch can then be submitted to the JDK 8 Updates Project[3] for review. It looks like JDK 9 is not affected. The Unsafe class was updated to return better detection for that call via JDK-8026049. [1] http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net [3] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/ Regards, Sean. On 06/02/17 10:14, Vaibhav Vaingankar wrote: > > Hello, > > We are building HBase source code using OpenJDK 8 on s390x platform, we > encountered some testcase failures related to bit unalignment. > We discovered that java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x. > However similar issue had reported on ppc and was resolved by adding ppc > support in ByteArrayAccess.java and ByteArrayAccess.java, following is the > changeset link: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/8d16f74380a7 > > Referring to above changeset we added s390x support in both the classes. > The resultant JDK could resolve the testcase failure. > > Let me know how to add s390x support to the OpenJDK 8 source. Any > suggestion are appreciated. > > Thanks and regards. > Vaibhav Vaingankar From david.holmes at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 11:28:30 2017 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 21:28:30 +1000 Subject: java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6dd32151-6153-7d0c-2829-2b20a685a1cd@oracle.com> Hi, On 6/02/2017 8:14 PM, Vaibhav Vaingankar wrote: > > > Hello, > > We are building HBase source code using OpenJDK 8 on s390x platform, we > encountered some testcase failures related to bit unalignment. > We discovered that java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x. > However similar issue had reported on ppc and was resolved by adding ppc > support in ByteArrayAccess.java and ByteArrayAccess.java, following is the > changeset link: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/jdk/rev/8d16f74380a7 > > Referring to above changeset we added s390x support in both the classes. > The resultant JDK could resolve the testcase failure. > > Let me know how to add s390x support to the OpenJDK 8 source. Any > suggestion are appreciated. The s390x port was for JDK 9 and as far as I am aware it has not been ported to JDK 8u. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166730 David ------ > Thanks and regards. > Vaibhav Vaingankar > From sean.coffey at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 11:36:49 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 11:36:49 +0000 Subject: Misleading commentary on 8160347 In-Reply-To: <365bb9d5e584461a9db7dcc35111361e@HEL-EXCH-02.corp.vaisala.com> References: <365bb9d5e584461a9db7dcc35111361e@HEL-EXCH-02.corp.vaisala.com> Message-ID: <58985FD1.2000709@oracle.com> The issue can be reproduced with original test provided in bug report. (BTW, you're attachment was pulled by the OpenJDK mail servers). I'll update the bug report. The test is working as per code that's present. We end up making a call to here : https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/net/ssl/SSLSocketFactory.html#getDefault-- There seems to be confusion over specification versus implementation here. https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/javax/net/ssl/HttpsURLConnection.html#getDefaultSSLSocketFactory-- is at odds with code that's called. Regards, Sean. On 06/02/17 10:57, tuure.laurinolli at vaisala.com wrote: > Hi, > > The commentary on https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8160347 is a bit misleading. The comment says that the issue could not be reproduced, but it seems to me that the attached output in the comment does reproduce the issue. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 15:57:11 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:57:11 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8153134: Infinite loop in handle_wrong_method in jmod In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170206155711.GB3636@tecra> Hi Vladimir, Changes look identical to me, I assume the "mostly cleanly" refers to line fuzzing? -Rob On 06/02/17 11:07, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > Hello, > > Please, approve this backport of JDK-8153134 to JDK8u-dev. > > The fix applies mostly cleanly. > > Tested with jprt. > > Regards, > Vladimir > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153134 > > JDK8 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8153134/webrev.00/ > > JDK9 changesets: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f482f393222d > From vladimir.kempik at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 17:22:32 2017 From: vladimir.kempik at oracle.com (Vladimir Kempik) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:22:32 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8153134: Infinite loop in handle_wrong_method in jmod In-Reply-To: <20170206155711.GB3636@tecra> References: <20170206155711.GB3636@tecra> Message-ID: that's right 06.02.17 18:57, Rob McKenna ?????: > Hi Vladimir, > > Changes look identical to me, I assume the "mostly cleanly" refers to > line fuzzing? > > -Rob > > On 06/02/17 11:07, Vladimir Kempik wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please, approve this backport of JDK-8153134 to JDK8u-dev. >> >> The fix applies mostly cleanly. >> >> Tested with jprt. >> >> Regards, >> Vladimir >> >> JBS: >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153134 >> >> JDK8 webrev: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8153134/webrev.00/ >> >> JDK9 changesets: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f482f393222d >> From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 19:21:01 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 19:21:01 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8153134: Infinite loop in handle_wrong_method in jmod In-Reply-To: References: <20170206155711.GB3636@tecra> Message-ID: <20170206192101.GC3636@tecra> Approved -Rob On 06/02/17 08:22, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > that's right > > > 06.02.17 18:57, Rob McKenna ?????: > >Hi Vladimir, > > > >Changes look identical to me, I assume the "mostly cleanly" refers to > >line fuzzing? > > > > -Rob > > > >On 06/02/17 11:07, Vladimir Kempik wrote: > >>Hello, > >> > >>Please, approve this backport of JDK-8153134 to JDK8u-dev. > >> > >>The fix applies mostly cleanly. > >> > >>Tested with jprt. > >> > >>Regards, > >>Vladimir > >> > >>JBS: > >>https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153134 > >> > >>JDK8 webrev: > >>http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vkempik/8153134/webrev.00/ > >> > >>JDK9 changesets: > >>http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/f482f393222d > >> > From philip.race at oracle.com Mon Feb 6 23:38:00 2017 From: philip.race at oracle.com (Phil Race) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:38:00 -0800 Subject: RFA: 8170493: JNI exception pending in JavaComponentAccessibility.m Message-ID: <87a334ce-9b26-2a63-bf39-9872ff6cef79@oracle.com> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170493 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/05b82284817f 9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-January/012533.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012565.html Identical one line fix as JDK9 JPRT used to verify the build. -phil. From david.buck at oracle.com Tue Feb 7 04:59:05 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:59:05 +0900 Subject: RFA: 8170493: JNI exception pending in JavaComponentAccessibility.m In-Reply-To: <87a334ce-9b26-2a63-bf39-9872ff6cef79@oracle.com> References: <87a334ce-9b26-2a63-bf39-9872ff6cef79@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Phil! The bug report will need a noreg label. [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Once an appropriate noreg label has been added to the bug report, please consider this change approved for backport to 8u-dev. Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/07 8:38, Phil Race wrote: > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170493 > 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/05b82284817f > 9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-January/012533.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012565.html > > Identical one line fix as JDK9 > JPRT used to verify the build. > > -phil. From mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com Tue Feb 7 16:41:40 2017 From: mikhail.cherkasov at oracle.com (Mikhail Cherkasov) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 19:41:40 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8173145: Menu is activated after using mnemonic Alt/Key combination Message-ID: <8d4c32a6-2317-c2e9-8da2-ceb35fac06ab@oracle.com> Hi all, Could you please approve a backport of 8173145 to jdk8? The fix is absolutely identical(after patch unshuffling) jbs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173145 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/fbddaaa26e1b review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2017-February/007175.html jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8173145/webrev.8/ Thanks, Mikhail. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 7 16:51:31 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 16:51:31 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] RFA: 8173145: Menu is activated after using mnemonic Alt/Key combination In-Reply-To: <8d4c32a6-2317-c2e9-8da2-ceb35fac06ab@oracle.com> References: <8d4c32a6-2317-c2e9-8da2-ceb35fac06ab@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170207165131.GD2654@vimes> Approved -Rob On 07/02/17 07:41, Mikhail Cherkasov wrote: > Hi all, > > Could you please approve a backport of 8173145 to jdk8? > The fix is absolutely identical(after patch unshuffling) > > jbs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173145 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/fbddaaa26e1b > review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/swing-dev/2017-February/007175.html > jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mcherkas/8173145/webrev.8/ > > Thanks, > Mikhail. From gnu.andrew at redhat.com Wed Feb 8 01:16:55 2017 From: gnu.andrew at redhat.com (Andrew Hughes) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 20:16:55 -0500 (EST) Subject: [8u communication] Changes to JDK 8u122 plans In-Reply-To: <9118dbef-4d06-5e4f-7f6a-0a3dfe50cd21@oracle.com> References: <996798545.1484754.1484153250749.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <9118dbef-4d06-5e4f-7f6a-0a3dfe50cd21@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1276485280.1360405.1486516615901.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> snip... > > Where will the few changes for 8u122 end up? 8u121 or 8u132? > > Oracle JDK 8u121 has been released on Tuesday, January 17th, and the > corresponding applicable changes have already made their way into the > jdk8u master forest. > > If a change is applicable for inclusion in a future CPU release as a > critical fix, then after its proposed for inclusion per the process > mentioned above, and in case it has been approved, it would appear in a > future CPU release - not sooner than in the next scheduled one. > > The CPU schedule can be found here: > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/security/alerts-086861.html > I'm aware of this. What about those changes that aren't "proposed for inclusion"? You say, in reply to Martin's e-mail, that "The OpenJDK JDK 8 Updates Project doesn't develop the CPU releases itself", which implies that this inclusion process for CPU releases is something separate from the OpenJDK 8 Updates project. We do know that the result is not something that is visible to the public until the "bulk integration" you refer to, so it does not seem an appropriate replacement for the releases that are part of this project. Will the changes be included in the next release by this project? That seems to now be 8u152, though there is no deadline for it [1]. What happened to 8u132 and 8u142? [0] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-January/006370.html [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u152.html > cheers, > dalibor topic > -- > Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager > Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 > > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg > > ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG > Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen > Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 > > Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. > Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande > Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 > Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher > > Oracle is committed to developing > practices and products that help protect the environment > Thanks, -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222 From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 11:53:19 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:53:19 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval : 8173783: IllegalArgumentException: jdk.tls.namedGroups Message-ID: I'd like to push the following fix to jdk8u-dev. bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173783 webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8173783.jdk8u-dev/webrev/ It's similar to the JDK 9 fix. I had to use the println method for the Debug class since 'log' isn't in the JDK 8u sources. I also updated the testcase with a different path to keystore. cc'ing Xuelei also to confirm that changes are ok. -- Regards, Sean. From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 12:06:05 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 21:06:05 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval : 8173783: IllegalArgumentException: jdk.tls.namedGroups In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: approved for push to 8u-dev pending successful code review Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/08 20:53, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I'd like to push the following fix to jdk8u-dev. > > bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173783 > webrev : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8173783.jdk8u-dev/webrev/ > > It's similar to the JDK 9 fix. I had to use the println method for the > Debug class since 'log' isn't in the JDK 8u sources. I also updated the > testcase with a different path to keystore. > > cc'ing Xuelei also to confirm that changes are ok. > From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 13:15:52 2017 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 14:15:52 +0100 Subject: java.nio.Bits.unaligned() doesn't return true on s390x In-Reply-To: <6dd32151-6153-7d0c-2829-2b20a685a1cd@oracle.com> References: <6dd32151-6153-7d0c-2829-2b20a685a1cd@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5da16898-fb04-c093-ed29-cd8313a60ee6@oracle.com> On 06.02.2017 12:28, David Holmes wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/02/2017 8:14 PM, Vaibhav Vaingankar wrote: >> Let me know how to add s390x support to the OpenJDK 8 source. Any >> suggestion are appreciated. > > The s390x port was for JDK 9 and as far as I am aware it has not been > ported to JDK 8u. That's correct, afaict. I'd be curious to learn what this 8u s390x port is running on - zero? cheers, dalibor topic -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From nikita.j.jain at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 13:50:00 2017 From: nikita.j.jain at oracle.com (Nikita Jain) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:50:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: RFA: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updates Message-ID: Hi All, Please approve this fix. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171151 Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-January/006365.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-February/006393.html Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.02/ Thanks, Nikita Jain From sean.coffey at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 13:51:57 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:51:57 +0000 Subject: RFA: JDK-8171151 - JDK8u ProblemList.txt Updates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Approved. I'll push this change to jdk8u-dev forest for you Nikita. Regards, Sean. On 08/02/17 13:50, Nikita Jain wrote: > Hi All, > > Please approve this fix. > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171151 > Public review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-January/006365.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-February/006393.html > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rpatil/8171151/webrev.02/ > > Thanks, > Nikita Jain From xuelei.fan at oracle.com Wed Feb 8 17:35:37 2017 From: xuelei.fan at oracle.com (Xuelei Fan) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 09:35:37 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for review and approval : 8173783: IllegalArgumentException: jdk.tls.namedGroups In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Looks fine to me. Thanks, Xuelei On 2/8/2017 3:53 AM, Se?n Coffey wrote: > I'd like to push the following fix to jdk8u-dev. > > bug report : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173783 > webrev : > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8173783.jdk8u-dev/webrev/ > > It's similar to the JDK 9 fix. I had to use the println method for the > Debug class since 'log' isn't in the JDK 8u sources. I also updated the > testcase with a different path to keystore. > > cc'ing Xuelei also to confirm that changes are ok. > From prasanta.sadhukhan at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 05:55:24 2017 From: prasanta.sadhukhan at oracle.com (Prasanta Sadhukhan) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 11:25:24 +0530 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport JDK-8170578: CUPS Printing is broken with Ubuntu 16.10 (CUPS 2.2) In-Reply-To: <589B5D8A.9080808@oracle.com> References: <505eafd8-f8e9-0ae5-2d95-81b5ae86509a@oracle.com> <589B5D8A.9080808@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi All, Can I please get an approval to port the fix for JDK-8170578 to jdk8u-dev? JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170578 webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8170578/8udev/webrev.00/ 8u Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008184.html 9 Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-January/008174.html [ bug subject was changed after the review] JDK9 changset: /http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8170578/webrev.02/ / Regards Prasanta From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 06:20:33 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 15:20:33 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval to backport JDK-8170578: CUPS Printing is broken with Ubuntu 16.10 (CUPS 2.2) In-Reply-To: References: <505eafd8-f8e9-0ae5-2d95-81b5ae86509a@oracle.com> <589B5D8A.9080808@oracle.com> Message-ID: approved for push to 8u-dev For JDK 9 change sets, please always be sure to send a link to the change in the JDK 9 repository, not a webrev link. http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/bdb8499fdb64 Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/09 14:55, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote: > Hi All, > > Can I please get an approval to port the fix for JDK-8170578 to jdk8u-dev? > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170578 > webrev:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8170578/8udev/webrev.00/ > 8u Review Thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008184.html > 9 Review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-January/008174.html [ > bug subject was changed after the review] > JDK9 changset: > /http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psadhukhan/8170578/webrev.02/ > / > > Regards > Prasanta > From hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 16:34:59 2017 From: hannes.wallnoefer at oracle.com (=?utf-8?Q?Hannes_Walln=C3=B6fer?=) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:34:59 +0100 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8169481: StackOverflowError on start when parsing PAC file to autodetect Proxy settings Message-ID: <4AD2D7F9-AE29-4C5C-A2C4-E5A6C093900C@oracle.com> Please approve backport to 8u-dev: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169481 JDK9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8169481/webrev-9/ JDK8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8169481/webrev-8u/ Review thread: webrev was reviewed via private email The patch applies cleanly to 8u. The original fix for 9 contained a test script that caused other tests to fail on various platforms, so the test was removed and the original bug marked as noreg-hard (see JDK-8173888). The 8u backport does not contain the test. Thanks, Hannes From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 16:48:14 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:48:14 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8153925: (fs) WatchService hangs on GetOverlappedResult and locks directory (win) Message-ID: <20170209164814.GA2776@vimes> Hi folks, Patch applies cleanly: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153925 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2016-April/003655.html http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4da0f73ce03a -Rob From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 16:49:37 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:49:37 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8169481: StackOverflowError on start when parsing PAC file to autodetect Proxy settings In-Reply-To: <4AD2D7F9-AE29-4C5C-A2C4-E5A6C093900C@oracle.com> References: <4AD2D7F9-AE29-4C5C-A2C4-E5A6C093900C@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170209164937.GB2776@vimes> Approved -Rob On 09/02/17 05:34, Hannes Walln?fer wrote: > Please approve backport to 8u-dev: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169481 > JDK9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8169481/webrev-9/ > JDK8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8169481/webrev-8u/ > Review thread: webrev was reviewed via private email > > The patch applies cleanly to 8u. The original fix for 9 contained a test script that caused other tests to fail on various platforms, so the test was removed and the original bug marked as noreg-hard (see JDK-8173888). The 8u backport does not contain the test. > > Thanks, > Hannes From sean.coffey at oracle.com Thu Feb 9 16:52:19 2017 From: sean.coffey at oracle.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Se=c3=a1n_Coffey?=) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:52:19 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval - 8153925: (fs) WatchService hangs on GetOverlappedResult and locks directory (win) In-Reply-To: <20170209164814.GA2776@vimes> References: <20170209164814.GA2776@vimes> Message-ID: <148b4406-86de-7ea3-4025-8601912e12aa@oracle.com> Approved. regards, Sean. On 09/02/2017 16:48, Rob McKenna wrote: > Hi folks, > > Patch applies cleanly: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8153925 > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/nio-dev/2016-April/003655.html > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/4da0f73ce03a > > -Rob > From amoss at tikalk.com Sun Feb 12 07:27:01 2017 From: amoss at tikalk.com (Amos Sonnenwirth) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 09:27:01 +0200 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? Message-ID: Hi, I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when trying to manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific version I need. Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in case you can give me an official link for this specific version Thanks in advanced for your help From bob.vandette at oracle.com Sun Feb 12 13:50:01 2017 From: bob.vandette at oracle.com (Bob Vandette) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2017 08:50:01 -0500 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8A7B4EA6-1BFF-4B9E-A4C3-0BCCA1950419@oracle.com> Try this page: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/java-archive-javase8-2177648.html Bob. > On Feb 12, 2017, at 2:27 AM, Amos Sonnenwirth wrote: > > Hi, > > I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode > 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. > > On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when trying to > manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific version I > need. > > Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in case > you can give me an official link for this specific version > > Thanks in advanced for your help From david.holmes at oracle.com Sun Feb 12 21:03:20 2017 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 07:03:20 +1000 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? In-Reply-To: <8A7B4EA6-1BFF-4B9E-A4C3-0BCCA1950419@oracle.com> References: <8A7B4EA6-1BFF-4B9E-A4C3-0BCCA1950419@oracle.com> Message-ID: <490f1774-c386-d916-5ebe-2b9fe654e4b5@oracle.com> Hi Bob, On 12/02/2017 11:50 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: > Try this page: > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/java-archive-javase8-2177648.html That's the Oracle JDK, but I think they were looking for the matching OpenJDK build that gets distributed on Linux. David > > Bob. > >> On Feb 12, 2017, at 2:27 AM, Amos Sonnenwirth wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode >> 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. >> >> On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when trying to >> manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific version I >> need. >> >> Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in case >> you can give me an official link for this specific version >> >> Thanks in advanced for your help > From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Mon Feb 13 08:53:14 2017 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:53:14 +0100 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? In-Reply-To: <490f1774-c386-d916-5ebe-2b9fe654e4b5@oracle.com> References: <8A7B4EA6-1BFF-4B9E-A4C3-0BCCA1950419@oracle.com> <490f1774-c386-d916-5ebe-2b9fe654e4b5@oracle.com> Message-ID: Since we don't provide the docker image, they will need to ask whoever provides it directly. cheers, dalibor topic On 12.02.2017 22:03, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Bob, > > On 12/02/2017 11:50 PM, Bob Vandette wrote: >> Try this page: >> >> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/java-archive-javase8-2177648.html >> >> > > That's the Oracle JDK, but I think they were looking for the matching > OpenJDK build that gets distributed on Linux. > > David > >> >> Bob. >> >>> On Feb 12, 2017, at 2:27 AM, Amos Sonnenwirth wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode >>> 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. >>> >>> On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when >>> trying to >>> manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific >>> version I >>> need. >>> >>> Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in >>> case >>> you can give me an official link for this specific version >>> >>> Thanks in advanced for your help >> -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From sergey.grinev at azul.com Mon Feb 13 14:01:08 2017 From: sergey.grinev at azul.com (Sergey Grinev) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 14:01:08 +0000 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8542F714-CB96-4C56-95AE-F4E05872B308@azulsystems.com> Hi Amos, you can try Zulu OpenJDK build: docker run -it --rm azul/zulu-openjdk:8u102 java -version more info here: https://hub.docker.com/u/azul/ ? Sergey On 12 Feb 2017, at 10:27 , Amos Sonnenwirth > wrote: Hi, I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when trying to manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific version I need. Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in case you can give me an official link for this specific version Thanks in advanced for your help From yasuenag at gmail.com Tue Feb 14 13:16:41 2017 From: yasuenag at gmail.com (Yasumasa Suenaga) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 22:16:41 +0900 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO Message-ID: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> Hi all, JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020968.html http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020973.html In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as DSO for security [1]. java command in OpenJDK which is provided by distribution is also DSO. However, SA does not work with DSO executables. Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. Thanks, Yasumasa [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 14 23:09:05 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 23:09:05 +0000 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO In-Reply-To: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> References: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> Approved, but please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. Also please work with the serviceability team to get this pushed. -Rob On 14/02/17 10:16, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > Hi all, > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 > > 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 > > 9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020968.html > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/2017-February/020973.html > > In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as DSO for security [1]. > java command in OpenJDK which is provided by distribution is also DSO. > However, SA does not work with DSO executables. > > Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. > So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. > > > I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. > > > Thanks, > > Yasumasa > > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE From yasuenag at gmail.com Tue Feb 14 23:38:52 2017 From: yasuenag at gmail.com (Yasumasa Suenaga) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 08:38:52 +0900 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO In-Reply-To: <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> References: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> Message-ID: * I added serviceability-dev Hi all, JDK-8173941 has been approved to push to jdk8u repo. I added noreg label to JBS. Could you help me to push it? Thanks, Yasumasa 2017/02/15 ??8:09 "Rob McKenna" : > Approved, but please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. Also > please work with the serviceability team to get this pushed. > > -Rob > > On 14/02/17 10:16, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > JBS: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 > > > > 9 changeset: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 > > > > 9 review: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ > 2017-February/020968.html > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ > 2017-February/020973.html > > > > In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as DSO for > security [1]. > > java command in OpenJDK which is provided by distribution is also DSO. > > However, SA does not work with DSO executables. > > > > Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. > > So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. > > > > > > I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Yasumasa > > > > > > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE > From david.holmes at oracle.com Tue Feb 14 23:57:22 2017 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:57:22 +1000 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO In-Reply-To: References: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> Message-ID: Hi Yasumasa, On 15/02/2017 9:38 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > * I added serviceability-dev > > Hi all, > > JDK-8173941 has been approved to push to jdk8u repo. > I added noreg label to JBS. Could you help me to push it? An 'appropriate noreg label' has to follow the guidelines here: http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg I changed it to noreg-hard and added an explanatory comment. I will push this to jdk8u/dev for you. David ----- > > Thanks, > > Yasumasa > > > 2017/02/15 ??8:09 "Rob McKenna" : > >> Approved, but please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. Also >> please work with the serviceability team to get this pushed. >> >> -Rob >> >> On 14/02/17 10:16, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> JBS: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 >>> >>> 9 changeset: >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 >>> >>> 9 review: >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ >> 2017-February/020968.html >>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ >> 2017-February/020973.html >>> >>> In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as DSO for >> security [1]. >>> java command in OpenJDK which is provided by distribution is also DSO. >>> However, SA does not work with DSO executables. >>> >>> Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. >>> So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. >>> >>> >>> I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Yasumasa >>> >>> >>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE >> From yasuenag at gmail.com Wed Feb 15 00:00:35 2017 From: yasuenag at gmail.com (Yasumasa Suenaga) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 09:00:35 +0900 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO In-Reply-To: References: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> Message-ID: Thanks David, and sorry to add incorrect label. Yasumasa 2017/02/15 ??8:57 "David Holmes" : > Hi Yasumasa, > > On 15/02/2017 9:38 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > >> * I added serviceability-dev >> >> Hi all, >> >> JDK-8173941 has been approved to push to jdk8u repo. >> I added noreg label to JBS. Could you help me to push it? >> > > An 'appropriate noreg label' has to follow the guidelines here: > > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg > > I changed it to noreg-hard and added an explanatory comment. I will push > this to jdk8u/dev for you. > > David > ----- > > >> Thanks, >> >> Yasumasa >> >> >> 2017/02/15 ??8:09 "Rob McKenna" : >> >> Approved, but please add an appropriate noreg label to the bug. Also >>> please work with the serviceability team to get this pushed. >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>> On 14/02/17 10:16, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: >>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> JBS: >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 >>>> >>>> 9 changeset: >>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 >>>> >>>> 9 review: >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ >>>> >>> 2017-February/020968.html >>> >>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ >>>> >>> 2017-February/020973.html >>> >>>> >>>> In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as DSO for >>>> >>> security [1]. >>> >>>> java command in OpenJDK which is provided by distribution is also DSO. >>>> However, SA does not work with DSO executables. >>>> >>>> Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. >>>> So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Yasumasa >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE >>>> >>> >>> From david.holmes at oracle.com Wed Feb 15 00:05:36 2017 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:05:36 +1000 Subject: RFA: 8173941: SA does not work if executable is DSO In-Reply-To: References: <5319530e-b62d-5393-8807-b8fb7af02293@gmail.com> <20170214230905.GA2647@vimes> Message-ID: <7a9defda-3ddb-d318-f333-784b7009e065@oracle.com> On 15/02/2017 10:00 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > Thanks David, and sorry to add incorrect label. No problem. Where is the patch for 8u? Thanks, David > Yasumasa > > > 2017/02/15 ??8:57 "David Holmes" >: > > Hi Yasumasa, > > On 15/02/2017 9:38 AM, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > > * I added serviceability-dev > > Hi all, > > JDK-8173941 has been approved to push to jdk8u repo. > I added noreg label to JBS. Could you help me to push it? > > > An 'appropriate noreg label' has to follow the guidelines here: > > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg > > > I changed it to noreg-hard and added an explanatory comment. I will > push this to jdk8u/dev for you. > > David > ----- > > > Thanks, > > Yasumasa > > > 2017/02/15 ??8:09 "Rob McKenna" >: > > Approved, but please add an appropriate noreg label to the > bug. Also > please work with the serviceability team to get this pushed. > > -Rob > > On 14/02/17 10:16, Yasumasa Suenaga wrote: > > Hi all, > > JBS: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173941 > > > 9 changeset: > > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/b3d95edd4467 > > > 9 review: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ > > > 2017-February/020968.html > > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/serviceability-dev/ > > > 2017-February/020973.html > > > In modern Linux e.g. Fedora 25, executables are built as > DSO for > > security [1]. > > java command in OpenJDK which is provided by > distribution is also DSO. > However, SA does not work with DSO executables. > > Currently, OpenJDK 8 in Fedora 25 is built as DSO. > So I want to contribute this patch to jdk8u. > > > I'm not a committer of jdk8u. So I need a sponsor. > > > Thanks, > > Yasumasa > > > [1] > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#PIE > > > From poonam.bajaj at oracle.com Wed Feb 15 00:54:57 2017 From: poonam.bajaj at oracle.com (Poonam Bajaj Parhar) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:54:57 -0800 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8081219: hs_err improvement: Add event logging for class redefinition to the hs_err file Message-ID: Hello, Please approve this backport to 8u-dev. Patch applies cleanly: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081219 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/918d124e7e39 9 review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2015-June/014925.html 8u review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022574.html Thanks, Poonam From david.buck at oracle.com Wed Feb 15 02:50:57 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:50:57 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: 8081219: hs_err improvement: Add event logging for class redefinition to the hs_err file In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Poonam! Please add the appropriate noreg label to the bug report. [ noreg bug labels ] http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg Once a noreg label has been added, please consider this change approved for backport to 8u-dev. Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/15 9:54, Poonam Bajaj Parhar wrote: > Hello, > > Please approve this backport to 8u-dev. Patch applies cleanly: > > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8081219 > 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/918d124e7e39 > 9 review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2015-June/014925.html > > 8u review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022574.html > > > Thanks, > Poonam > > From dmitry.markov at oracle.com Thu Feb 16 16:21:33 2017 From: dmitry.markov at oracle.com (Dmitry Markov) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:21:33 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8163979: [macosx] Chinese text shows as Latin w/ openVanilla input method Message-ID: <5EE6599A-F505-4F9D-8BF4-0371FF99B313@oracle.com> Hello, Can I get an approval to port the fix for 8163979 to jdk8u-dev, please? The jdk9 patch applies cleanly. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8163979 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8163979/jdk8u/webrev.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012591.html jdk9 changes: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/9b01b12f022c Thanks, Dmitry From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Feb 16 16:38:27 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:38:27 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8163979: [macosx] Chinese text shows as Latin w/ openVanilla input method In-Reply-To: <5EE6599A-F505-4F9D-8BF4-0371FF99B313@oracle.com> References: <5EE6599A-F505-4F9D-8BF4-0371FF99B313@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170216163827.GC2479@vimes> Approved -Rob On 16/02/17 07:21, Dmitry Markov wrote: > Hello, > > Can I get an approval to port the fix for 8163979 to jdk8u-dev, please? The jdk9 patch applies cleanly. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8163979 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8163979/jdk8u/webrev.00/ > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012591.html > jdk9 changes: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/9b01b12f022c > > Thanks, > Dmitry From dmitry.markov at oracle.com Thu Feb 16 16:59:49 2017 From: dmitry.markov at oracle.com (Dmitry Markov) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 19:59:49 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8170950: Text is displayed in bold when fonts are installed into symlinked folder Message-ID: Hello, Can I get an approval to port the fix for 8170950 to jdk8u-dev, please? The jdk9 patch applies cleanly. JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170950 Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8170950/jdk8u/webrev.00/ Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-January/008164.html jdk9 changes: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/7ba90377c7f4 Thanks, Dmitry From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Thu Feb 16 17:11:10 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:11:10 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8170950: Text is displayed in bold when fonts are installed into symlinked folder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170216171110.GD2479@vimes> Approved -Rob On 16/02/17 07:59, Dmitry Markov wrote: > Hello, > > Can I get an approval to port the fix for 8170950 to jdk8u-dev, please? The jdk9 patch applies cleanly. > > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170950 > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8170950/jdk8u/webrev.00/ > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-January/008164.html > jdk9 changes: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/7ba90377c7f4 > > Thanks, > Dmitry From semyon.sadetsky at oracle.com Fri Feb 17 08:49:55 2017 From: semyon.sadetsky at oracle.com (Semyon Sadetsky) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 11:49:55 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport 6980209: Make tracking SecondaryLoop.enter/exit methods easier Message-ID: <1f802b82-a1e8-9746-999d-559f5e9272b7@oracle.com> Hello, Could you please approve a backport to jdk8? bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6980209 jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/f8439c2af95a review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-March/009137.html jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/6980209/8u/webrev.00/ The fix is identical to 9. --Semyon From david.buck at oracle.com Fri Feb 17 08:56:45 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 17:56:45 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport 6980209: Make tracking SecondaryLoop.enter/exit methods easier In-Reply-To: <1f802b82-a1e8-9746-999d-559f5e9272b7@oracle.com> References: <1f802b82-a1e8-9746-999d-559f5e9272b7@oracle.com> Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev remaining portion of code review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-April/009172.html Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/17 17:49, Semyon Sadetsky wrote: > Hello, > > Could you please approve a backport to jdk8? > > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6980209 > jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/f8439c2af95a > review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2015-March/009137.html > jdk8 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/6980209/8u/webrev.00/ > > The fix is identical to 9. > > --Semyon > From dmitry.markov at oracle.com Mon Feb 20 09:14:20 2017 From: dmitry.markov at oracle.com (dmitry markov) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:14:20 +0300 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8170552 & 8175025 Message-ID: <58AAB36C.6070601@oracle.com> Hello, Can I get an approval to backport the following fixes: 8170552 and 8175025 to 8u-dev, please? Both patches apply cleanly. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170552 ([macosx] Wrong rendering of diacritics on macOS) Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008199.html jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/04b8a8fb5806 Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175025 (The copyright section in the test/java/awt/font/TextLayout/DiacriticsDrawingTest.java should be updated) Review: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008223.html jdk9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/7f92506142d1 Cumulative jdk8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8170552_and_8175025/webrev.00/ Thanks, Dmitry From david.buck at oracle.com Mon Feb 20 10:41:03 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 19:41:03 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval 8170552 & 8175025 In-Reply-To: <58AAB36C.6070601@oracle.com> References: <58AAB36C.6070601@oracle.com> Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/20 18:14, dmitry markov wrote: > Hello, > > Can I get an approval to backport the following fixes: 8170552 and > 8175025 to 8u-dev, please? Both patches apply cleanly. > > Bug: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170552 > ([macosx] Wrong rendering of diacritics on macOS) > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008199.html > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/04b8a8fb5806 > > Bug: > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175025 > (The copyright section in the > test/java/awt/font/TextLayout/DiacriticsDrawingTest.java should be updated) > Review: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2017-February/008223.html > jdk9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/7f92506142d1 > > Cumulative jdk8u webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dmarkov/8170552_and_8175025/webrev.00/ > > Thanks, > Dmitry From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Feb 21 12:08:34 2017 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (dalibor topic) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 13:08:34 +0100 Subject: [8u communication] Changes to JDK 8u122 plans In-Reply-To: <1276485280.1360405.1486516615901.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> References: <996798545.1484754.1484153250749.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <9118dbef-4d06-5e4f-7f6a-0a3dfe50cd21@oracle.com> <1276485280.1360405.1486516615901.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Message-ID: <79ed9879-40ce-843d-f815-d4a28a0ed871@oracle.com> On 08.02.2017 02:16, Andrew Hughes wrote: >> If a change is applicable for inclusion in a future CPU release as a >> critical fix, then after its proposed for inclusion per the process >> mentioned above, and in case it has been approved, it would appear in a >> future CPU release - not sooner than in the next scheduled one. > What about those changes that aren't "proposed for inclusion"? Unless someone proposed such changes for inclusion, they would not be included in a future CPU release. > Will the changes be included in the next release by this project? That's hard to tell with full certainty the closer a Project gets to a point where it reaches the end of the road under a given Project Lead. At some point in time Oracle will stop contributing to this Project, and a new Project Lead, assuming there is one, might chose to include all such unreleased changes, a subset of them, or to do something entirely different. On the other hand, the reasoning behind changes to 8u122 plans might end up holding for 8u152 as well - i.e., the tentative plans for that release might change, as well. It's too soon to really be able to tell, in other words. > That > seems to now be 8u152, though there is no deadline for it [1]. What > happened to 8u132 and 8u142? Per the Project's web site, there are no plans at this time for an OpenJDK 8u132 or an OpenJDK 8u142 release. cheers, dalibor topic > > [0] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2017-January/006370.html > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/releases/8u152.html -- Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager Phone: +494089091214 | Mobile: +491737185961 ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | K?hneh?fe 5 | 22761 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From alexandr.scherbatiy at oracle.com Wed Feb 22 15:24:27 2017 From: alexandr.scherbatiy at oracle.com (Alexander Scherbatiy) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:24:27 +0400 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8173876 Fast precise scrolling and DeltaAccumulator fix for macOS Sierra 10.12.2 Message-ID: <2385fbef-0e3f-56cd-ae57-fa92c7675cec@oracle.com> Hello, Could you approve the direct backport of the fix to JDK 8u-dev. JDK-8173876 Fast precise scrolling and DeltaAccumulator fix for macOS Sierra 10.12.2 The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173876 The JDK 9 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/sergey.malenkov/8173876/webrev-all.00/ The review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012580.html The JDK 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/ba316e40c19b Thanks, Alexandr. Thanks, Alexandr. From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Wed Feb 22 21:04:29 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 21:04:29 +0000 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for approval: 8173876 Fast precise scrolling and DeltaAccumulator fix for macOS Sierra 10.12.2 In-Reply-To: <2385fbef-0e3f-56cd-ae57-fa92c7675cec@oracle.com> References: <2385fbef-0e3f-56cd-ae57-fa92c7675cec@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170222210429.GA3274@tecra> Approved -Rob On 22/02/17 07:24, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote: > > Hello, > > Could you approve the direct backport of the fix to JDK 8u-dev. > JDK-8173876 Fast precise scrolling and DeltaAccumulator fix for macOS > Sierra 10.12.2 > > The bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8173876 > The JDK 9 webrev: > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/sergey.malenkov/8173876/webrev-all.00/ > The review thread: > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/awt-dev/2017-February/012580.html > The JDK 9 changeset: > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/client/jdk/rev/ba316e40c19b > > Thanks, > Alexandr. > > > Thanks, > Alexandr. > From ramanand.patil at oracle.com Thu Feb 23 02:00:33 2017 From: ramanand.patil at oracle.com (Ramanand Patil) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:00:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 7167293: FtpURLConnection connection leak on FileNotFoundException Message-ID: <1f19eb41-fe53-45f3-9f8c-d8d0657a331e@default> Hi, Please approve the backport of 7167293 to 8u-dev. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7167293 JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/8f5f8f0f265e JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2016-March/009597.html Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. Regards, Ramanand. From david.buck at oracle.com Thu Feb 23 02:09:22 2017 From: david.buck at oracle.com (David Buck) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:09:22 +0900 Subject: [8u-dev] Request for Approval: Backport of 7167293: FtpURLConnection connection leak on FileNotFoundException In-Reply-To: <1f19eb41-fe53-45f3-9f8c-d8d0657a331e@default> References: <1f19eb41-fe53-45f3-9f8c-d8d0657a331e@default> Message-ID: approved for backport to 8u-dev Cheers, -Buck On 2017/02/23 11:00, Ramanand Patil wrote: > Hi, > Please approve the backport of 7167293 to 8u-dev. > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7167293 > JDK9 Changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/8f5f8f0f265e > JDK9 Review Thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/net-dev/2016-March/009597.html > Changes apply cleanly to jdk8u-dev after path reshuffling. > > > Regards, > Ramanand. > From adinn at redhat.com Thu Feb 23 10:28:12 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 10:28:12 +0000 Subject: RFR: 8174729: Race Condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache Message-ID: <6179b584-287c-2f09-9026-d17f0fde612a@redhat.com> The following one line patch to the latest jdk8u tree fixes a race condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache: webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8174729/webrev.00 bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174729 The webrev also includes a regression test, provided by Peter Levart the original author of WeakCache. It fails consistently, albeit with no absolute guarantee, before the patch and never fails after patching. Could someone sponsor this for inclusion in 8u and others review it (n.b. I am a JDK9 committer but not a JDK8 committer). regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From mandy.chung at oracle.com Thu Feb 23 17:41:31 2017 From: mandy.chung at oracle.com (Mandy Chung) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:41:31 -0800 Subject: RFR: 8174729: Race Condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache In-Reply-To: <6179b584-287c-2f09-9026-d17f0fde612a@redhat.com> References: <6179b584-287c-2f09-9026-d17f0fde612a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <3FF02369-C12B-4361-870C-BEA6E5E55DCB@oracle.com> On Feb 23, 2017, at 2:28 AM, Andrew Dinn wrote: > > The following one line patch to the latest jdk8u tree fixes a race > condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache: > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8174729/webrev.00 > bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174729 > This fix looks good to me. Copyright header is missing in the new test. > The webrev also includes a regression test, provided by Peter Levart the > original author of WeakCache. It fails consistently, albeit with no > absolute guarantee, before the patch and never fails after patching. > > Could someone sponsor this for inclusion in 8u and others review it > (n.b. I am a JDK9 committer but not a JDK8 committer). I can sponsor it. Mandy From adinn at redhat.com Fri Feb 24 10:26:56 2017 From: adinn at redhat.com (Andrew Dinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 10:26:56 +0000 Subject: RFR: 8174729: Race Condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache In-Reply-To: <3FF02369-C12B-4361-870C-BEA6E5E55DCB@oracle.com> References: <6179b584-287c-2f09-9026-d17f0fde612a@redhat.com> <3FF02369-C12B-4361-870C-BEA6E5E55DCB@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Mandy, On 23/02/17 17:41, Mandy Chung wrote: > This fix looks good to me. Copyright header is missing in the new test. I have uploaded a new webrev with: - copyright header for the test - @author tag test to plevart - reviewed-by byline on commit for mchung at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8174729/webrev.01 > I can sponsor it. Thanks very much Mandy! regards, Andrew Dinn ----------- Senior Principal Software Engineer Red Hat UK Ltd Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From kevin.walls at oracle.com Fri Feb 24 11:06:26 2017 From: kevin.walls at oracle.com (Kevin Walls) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 11:06:26 +0000 Subject: 8162795: was: Re: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport 8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries In-Reply-To: <861ae548-a6a2-7700-9176-445d20f4b10b@oracle.com> References: <6de7a7dc-99eb-02d5-3aed-9f19ffbbfe22@oracle.com> <1bcab952-3036-118e-55cf-cbb62916b8e9@oracle.com> <861ae548-a6a2-7700-9176-445d20f4b10b@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4a1da4d4-699c-bb3c-d498-6b5faf86d0b5@oracle.com> Hi again, I'm back: 8152271 has been re-applied to 9. While it did cause a microbenchmark regression, certain apps have a more serious regression between jdk7 and 8, which is remedied by 8152271. The bug for the re-application is: 8162795: [REDO] MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8162795 So this is a request for approval to backport 8162795 into jdk8u-dev. The 9 changeset imports directly except for one copyright year difference. approval mails in 9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022620.html 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/b1606e8fee8c (which is Coleen's original change from JDK-8152271 with one copyright year change) Many thanks Kevin On 27/01/2017 12:48, Kevin Walls wrote: > > Oh, thanks David. There was me getting excited it solved all my > problems... > > Thanks > Kevin > > > On 27/01/2017 11:04, David Holmes wrote: >> Hi Kevin, >> >> On 27/01/2017 8:25 PM, Kevin Walls wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to backport the following to 8u-dev. >>> >>> 8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries >>> >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152271 >> >> That change was backed out again: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161445 >> >> David >> ----- >> >>> An hg import from the 9 changeset: >>> >>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/13b2c7ac95a5 >>> >>> ...works and tests well in jprt and with a manual testcase that >>> showed a >>> gc slowdown before the fix. >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> Kevin >>> >>> > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 24 14:01:28 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:01:28 +0000 Subject: RFR: 8174729: Race Condition in java.lang.reflect.WeakCache In-Reply-To: References: <6179b584-287c-2f09-9026-d17f0fde612a@redhat.com> <3FF02369-C12B-4361-870C-BEA6E5E55DCB@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170224140128.GC2511@vimes> Approved -Rob On 24/02/17 10:26, Andrew Dinn wrote: > Hi Mandy, > > On 23/02/17 17:41, Mandy Chung wrote: > > This fix looks good to me. Copyright header is missing in the new test. > > I have uploaded a new webrev with: > > - copyright header for the test > - @author tag test to plevart > - reviewed-by byline on commit for mchung > > at: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~adinn/8174729/webrev.01 > > > I can sponsor it. > > Thanks very much Mandy! > > regards, > > > Andrew Dinn > ----------- > Senior Principal Software Engineer > Red Hat UK Ltd > Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903 > Directors: Michael Cunningham, Michael ("Mike") O'Neill, Eric Shander From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Fri Feb 24 14:02:36 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:02:36 +0000 Subject: 8162795: was: Re: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport 8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries In-Reply-To: <4a1da4d4-699c-bb3c-d498-6b5faf86d0b5@oracle.com> References: <6de7a7dc-99eb-02d5-3aed-9f19ffbbfe22@oracle.com> <1bcab952-3036-118e-55cf-cbb62916b8e9@oracle.com> <861ae548-a6a2-7700-9176-445d20f4b10b@oracle.com> <4a1da4d4-699c-bb3c-d498-6b5faf86d0b5@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20170224140236.GD2511@vimes> Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the main bug. -Rob On 24/02/17 11:06, Kevin Walls wrote: > Hi again, > > I'm back: 8152271 has been re-applied to 9. While it did cause a > microbenchmark regression, certain apps have a more serious regression > between jdk7 and 8, which is remedied by 8152271. The bug for the > re-application is: > > 8162795: [REDO] MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8162795 > > > So this is a request for approval to backport 8162795 into jdk8u-dev. The 9 > changeset imports directly except for one copyright year difference. > > approval mails in 9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022620.html > 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/b1606e8fee8c > (which is Coleen's original change from JDK-8152271 with one copyright year > change) > > Many thanks > Kevin > > > On 27/01/2017 12:48, Kevin Walls wrote: > > > >Oh, thanks David. There was me getting excited it solved all my > >problems... > > > >Thanks > >Kevin > > > > > >On 27/01/2017 11:04, David Holmes wrote: > >>Hi Kevin, > >> > >>On 27/01/2017 8:25 PM, Kevin Walls wrote: > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>I'd like to backport the following to 8u-dev. > >>> > >>>8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries > >>> > >>>https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152271 > >> > >>That change was backed out again: > >> > >>https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161445 > >> > >>David > >>----- > >> > >>>An hg import from the 9 changeset: > >>> > >>>http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/13b2c7ac95a5 > >>> > >>>...works and tests well in jprt and with a manual testcase that showed > >>>a > >>>gc slowdown before the fix. > >>> > >>> > >>>Thanks > >>>Kevin > >>> > >>> > > > From kevin.walls at oracle.com Fri Feb 24 14:08:56 2017 From: kevin.walls at oracle.com (Kevin Walls) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:08:56 +0000 Subject: 8162795: was: Re: [8u-dev] Request for approval: backport 8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries In-Reply-To: <20170224140236.GD2511@vimes> References: <6de7a7dc-99eb-02d5-3aed-9f19ffbbfe22@oracle.com> <1bcab952-3036-118e-55cf-cbb62916b8e9@oracle.com> <861ae548-a6a2-7700-9176-445d20f4b10b@oracle.com> <4a1da4d4-699c-bb3c-d498-6b5faf86d0b5@oracle.com> <20170224140236.GD2511@vimes> Message-ID: Thanks Rob! On 24/02/2017 14:02, Rob McKenna wrote: > Approved. Please add an appropriate noreg label to the main bug. > > -Rob > > On 24/02/17 11:06, Kevin Walls wrote: >> Hi again, >> >> I'm back: 8152271 has been re-applied to 9. While it did cause a >> microbenchmark regression, certain apps have a more serious regression >> between jdk7 and 8, which is remedied by 8152271. The bug for the >> re-application is: >> >> 8162795: [REDO] MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8162795 >> >> >> So this is a request for approval to backport 8162795 into jdk8u-dev. The 9 >> changeset imports directly except for one copyright year difference. >> >> approval mails in 9: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2017-February/022620.html >> 9 changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/dev/hotspot/rev/b1606e8fee8c >> (which is Coleen's original change from JDK-8152271 with one copyright year >> change) >> >> Many thanks >> Kevin >> >> >> On 27/01/2017 12:48, Kevin Walls wrote: >>> Oh, thanks David. There was me getting excited it solved all my >>> problems... >>> >>> Thanks >>> Kevin >>> >>> >>> On 27/01/2017 11:04, David Holmes wrote: >>>> Hi Kevin, >>>> >>>> On 27/01/2017 8:25 PM, Kevin Walls wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to backport the following to 8u-dev. >>>>> >>>>> 8152271: MemberNameTable doesn't purge stale entries >>>>> >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8152271 >>>> That change was backed out again: >>>> >>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8161445 >>>> >>>> David >>>> ----- >>>> >>>>> An hg import from the 9 changeset: >>>>> >>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/13b2c7ac95a5 >>>>> >>>>> ...works and tests well in jprt and with a manual testcase that showed >>>>> a >>>>> gc slowdown before the fix. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Kevin >>>>> >>>>> From rwestrel at redhat.com Fri Feb 24 14:17:35 2017 From: rwestrel at redhat.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 15:17:35 +0100 Subject: [8u] request for approval: 8174164 & 8175097: SafePointNode::_replaced_nodes breaks with irreducible loops Message-ID: Hi, I'd like to backport 8174164 (and its test case 8175097) to 8u as it's an issue reported by one of our (Red Hat) customers. The patch doesn't apply cleanly: the part of library_call.cpp fails to apply but given library_call.cpp in 8u doesn't need to be changed for that fix, that part of the patch can simply be removed. So I assume no re-review is necessary. It was pushed to jdk9 1 week ago and hasn't caused any follow up bugs that I know of. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174164 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/35db0413819a https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175097 http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/8241f87c4712 8u webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8174164.8u/webrev.00/ Roland. From vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com Fri Feb 24 16:20:38 2017 From: vladimir.kozlov at oracle.com (Vladimir Kozlov) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 08:20:38 -0800 Subject: [8u] request for approval: 8174164 & 8175097: SafePointNode::_replaced_nodes breaks with irreducible loops In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5f99874c-8f2e-735c-315e-bd9c454435e6@oracle.com> 8u changes looks good. Thanks, Vladimir On 2/24/17 6:17 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote: > > Hi, > > I'd like to backport 8174164 (and its test case 8175097) to 8u as it's > an issue reported by one of our (Red Hat) customers. The patch doesn't > apply cleanly: the part of library_call.cpp fails to apply but given > library_call.cpp in 8u doesn't need to be changed for that fix, that > part of the patch can simply be removed. So I assume no re-review is > necessary. It was pushed to jdk9 1 week ago and hasn't caused any follow > up bugs that I know of. > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174164 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/35db0413819a > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175097 > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/hs/hotspot/rev/8241f87c4712 > > 8u webrev: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~roland/8174164.8u/webrev.00/ > > Roland. > From rob.mckenna at oracle.com Tue Feb 28 16:37:39 2017 From: rob.mckenna at oracle.com (Rob McKenna) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:37:39 +0000 Subject: [8u] Request for enhancement backport approval for CR 8044235 - nashorn (and other) sources are missing in src.zip In-Reply-To: <20170105151136.GA6561@tecra> References: <20170105151136.GA6561@tecra> Message-ID: <20170228163739.GB3561@vimes> This enhancement backport request is being declined. It's not suitable to introduce this change into an update release as it leads to a significant increase on the overall size of the final build images. Aside from continuing to carry it as a downstream build specific change, you might want to consider submitting an more curtailed enhancement request with a smaller src.zip increase instead." -Rob On 05/01/17 07:11, Rob McKenna wrote: > Thanks Jiri, this has been submitted for approval. I'll keep you posted. > > -Rob > > On 05/01/17 01:15, Jiri Vanek wrote: > > Hello! > > > > There is a lot of sources missing in src.zip from jdk8 build. All those are present in jdk9 src.zip. > > Even as jdk8 had intention to hide "private" sources, from the src.zip, > > missing nashorn can be considered as bug. > > However, when jdk9 reconsidered, jdk8 should follow. Most of the distros > > adapted the patch from 8044235[1] anyway. > > > > There are two approaches possible: > > - add only nashorn [2] and maybe later (or during this review) also zipfs > > - backport (and adapt) whole 8044235 patch [3] > > > > For [2], the src.zip grows by 1MB (from 23->24MB) > > For [3], the src.zip grow double - 51MB (jdk9 have src.zip of 62MB) > > > > Only SDK image is affected. > > > > note - src.zip i used only for IDEs to make debugging easy, and when > > debugging jdk itself (when *your* application is misbehaving), you are > > stepping through all binaries, so it is not correct to hide the sources for > > something you can step inside anyway. > > > > > > Skippable longstory: > > Recently I was debugging nashorn in jdk8, and realized, that nashorn sources > > are missing in it, although they are present in jdk9. > > Quick patch followed to build-dev: > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2017-January/018460.html > > There I was made aware about > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044235 and fact that it was long > > ago recommended for backport, but never done. > > However, the backport is much more complex then simple "add nashorn > > sources": > > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2017-January/018462.html > > > > From review later flown up taht it should be considered as enhancement > > instead of simple bugfix,but in al cases it should go over 8u-dev so here it > > is. > > > > Please see the whole thread of "RFC: nashorn sources are missing in src.zip" > > on http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2017-January/thread.html#start > > for complex info. > > As the result of this thread I copied the patches from fedorapeople.org to cr.openjdk.net. > > > > Bes regards from CZ, > > J. > > > > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044235 > > [2] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvanek/nashornMissingInSrcZip/v1/webrev/ > > [3] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvanek/nashornMissingInSrcZip/v2/webrev/ From sergey.grinev at azul.com Mon Feb 13 13:40:18 2017 From: sergey.grinev at azul.com (Sergey Grinev) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 13:40:18 -0000 Subject: Need openjdk version "1.8.0_102" - where can I find it ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <215E3FD0-4A34-45BB-9422-84AB8698A9D4@azulsystems.com> Hi Amos, you can try Zulu OpenJDK build: docker run -it --rm azul/zulu-openjdk:8u102 java -version more info here: https://hub.docker.com/u/azul/ ? Sergey On 12 Feb 2017, at 10:27 , Amos Sonnenwirth > wrote: Hi, I would like to download version 1.8.0_102 build 25.102-b14, mixed mode 64bit for ubuntu flavour docker image. On the official docker hub I see only the latest version and when trying to manipulate the docker file I don't manage to get to the specific version I need. Any suggestions ? I don't mind get this specific version manually in case you can give me an official link for this specific version Thanks in advanced for your help