Hi Laurent,
I submitted the following bug:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8144445
The change looks fine. Are the long modifiers (12L, 1L, etc) really
needed on the shift parameters given that the first operand (needSize)
is already a long?
202 size = ((needSize >> 12L) + 1L) << 12L;
...jim
On 11/27/15 3:42 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
Hi,
Here is a new webrev that fix the Renderer usage of getNewLargeSize() as
the overflow check fails due to integer maths:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lbourges/marlin/marlin-s6.1/
Patched line:
final long edgeNewSize = ArrayCache.getNewLargeSize(_edges.length,
- edgePtr + _SIZEOF_EDGE_BYTES);
+ ((long)edgePtr) + _SIZEOF_EDGE_BYTES);
The CrashTest passes again after the fix (automated tests are very cool) !
Laurent
2015-11-27 12:18 GMT+01:00 Laurent Bourgès <bourges.laur...@gmail.com
<mailto:bourges.laur...@gmail.com>>:
Hi Jim,
Here is a simple fix on potential overflow in
ArrayCache.getNewLargeSize() discussed during Marlin integration:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lbourges/marlin/marlin-s6.0/
I added the ArrayCacheSizeTest class which now passes in jtreg.
Could you create a bug, I am not sure what I should fill in the form ?
Laurent
--
--
Laurent Bourgès
