On Thu 04 Oct 2012 05:42:15 PM CEST, Alan Bateman wrote: > On 04/10/2012 16:28, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote: >> : >> This is a follow-up. I've prepared the patch and put it on github - >> https://github.com/jbachorik/openjdk-patches/tree/master/webrevs/7195779 >> >> I wonder who else should be included in the review process since I am >> changing the IIOP generator code. Also, I didn't find any tests in the >> corba repository. Which test suite is appropriate to run after changing >> the corba related code? >> >> -JB- >> > I don't mind being reviewer and sponsor for this. Also cc'ing Sean as > he is one of the maintainers of the corba code. I don't think the
Thanks. > corba tests are in OpenJDK, at least I don't think Oracle has > contributed its tests for this area. > > I think your change looks okay and I assume you've at least run the > JMX tests that use RMI-IIOP to verify that the intermittent NPE is > gone and those tests now pass reliably. Yes, I ran those. Especially on the test machine yielding the biggest ration of failed tests previously. Now they all pass. > > Minor comment but if I were doing this myself then I probably would > have added this instead: > p.pln(getName(theType) + " target = this.target;"); > > You'll see lots of examples of this in the core libs and j.u.c. No problem. If it is a convention I will stick to it (I've used a different variable name to prevent confusion about what is a field and what is a local variable). > > Also as target is now volatile then I'm not sure why you synchronized > around target=null, perhaps there is other code generated in the tie > class that I don't see? The synchronization should not be there. It just escaped my purging when I've exchanged the synchronized access for volatile. -JB- > > Otherwise it's great to get issue finally resolved. > > -Alan. > >
