[8u-dev] RFA: 8206075 / 8208480 : On x86, assert on unbound assembler Labels used as branch targets
Seán Coffey
sean.coffey at oracle.com
Mon Dec 17 11:49:42 UTC 2018
Looks like both bugs are missing the necessary noreg- labels. Please add
to master bug:
https://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html#noreg
Approved for jdk8u-dev.
Regards,
Sean.
On 13/12/18 19:25, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> It will be applied as a single changeset with multiple bugids. The webrev is the single changeset.
>
> On 12/13/18, 7:44 AM, "Andrew Hughes" <gnu.andrew at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 at 17:45, Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com> wrote:
> >
> > I pushed backports of 8206075, 8208480, and 8208647 to jdk11u. Combined request:
> >
> > Please approve this small backport to jdk8u.
> >
> > 8206075: On x86, assert on unbound assembler Labels used as branch targets
> > 8208480: Test failure: assert(is_bound() || is_unused()) after JDK-8206075 in C1
> > JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8206075 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8206075
> > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~phh/8206075.8208480/webrev.00/
> > Review thread: http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2018-July/029136 http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-runtime-dev/2018-August/029627.html
> >
> > The combined patch applies cleanly net of line number changes and file locations.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Paul
> >
>
> Will this be applied as two separate changesets? This isn't clear from
> the posted webrev.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Andrew :)
>
> Senior Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
>
> Web Site: http://fuseyism.com
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java
> PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
> Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
>
>
More information about the jdk8u-dev
mailing list