> On 26 Dec 2016, at 16:26, joe darcy <joe.da...@oracle.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > Assuming we'll want to revisit this work at some point, there are some > advantages to anti-delta-ing the code changes now, but just problem listing > the tests in terms of making a less confusing history.
My preference is to anti-delta. There are just too many tests failing, ~35 across all platforms and tiers. Peter, Let me know if you need any help pushing this. -Chris. > Thanks, > > -Joe > > > On 12/26/2016 1:58 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: >>> On 26 Dec 2016, at 09:35, Peter Levart <peter.lev...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Jeff, >>> >>> I've been told that the latest change I pushed causes some tests to fail, >>> so I prepared a backout patch for 8062389, 8029459, 8061950: >>> >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/Class.getMethods.new/backout.09/webrev.01/ >>> >>> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/Class.getMethods.new/backout.09/webrev.01/> >> I just grabbed the webrev patch, applied it to a local repo, then >> compared that against a repo that had been updated to the >> change prior to your push. They are identical, so this appears >> to be an accurate anti-delta. >> >> Maybe file a new bug, or just make it clear in the synopsis of >> 8171988 that it is an anti-delta. >> >> >>> From the stacktrace of the bug report, it seems an early initialization >>> issue with VarHandle(s) involved. Can you shed some light into what tests >>> are failing? >> I’ll post a few comments in 8171988 with sample failures. >> >> -Chris. >> >>> But first let us backout that change. >>> >>> Regards, Peter >>> >>>> On 12/26/2016 10:09 AM, Peter Levart wrote: >>>> Hi Jeff, >>>> >>>> I'm taking a look at this... >>>> >>>> Regards, Peter >>>> >>>>> On 12/26/2016 06:14 AM, Jeff Dinkins wrote: >>>>> Hi Peter - >>>>> >>>>> I just received mail from out SQE manager, saying that your last >>>>> changeset has caused our test harness to hiccup. I don’t have much more >>>>> detail besides the below bug, but I’m wondering if you could do us a huge >>>>> favor and roll your change back for now while it’s debugged (and so we >>>>> can get our automated tests going again). >>>>> >>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171988 >>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8171988> >>>>> >>>>> thanks! >>>>> >>>>> -jeff >>>>> >
