We discussed this offline and Gary pointed out that, at least in the
VMError case the attempt to SEGV by dereferencing zero is one of a
specific number of crash inducing cases, others of which include trying
to trigger SEGV at non-zero address and explicit signal raising. So
changing the code t
On 04/27/2018 06:50 PM, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 27, 2018, at 4:56 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
On 04/27/2018 12:55 AM, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
On 24 April 2018 at 20:17, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 23, 2018, at 3:51 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
Hi,
> On Apr 27, 2018, at 1:43 AM, David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 27/04/2018 4:20 AM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
>>> On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:09 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26/04/2018 2:34 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
Here is the incremental webrev with updates that incorporate all feedbacks:
http:
Looking at this again, the first part, in Main.gmk, has already been
addressed in https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198425. The patch
for the second part looks weird. The only real change I can see is the
?= for the jvmti.html file. The rest looks like there is no difference
(and I cann
> On Apr 27, 2018, at 4:56 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
>
>
>
> On 04/27/2018 12:55 AM, Kim Barrett wrote:
>>> On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>> On 24 April 2018 at 20:17, Kim Barrett wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2018, at 3:51 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>>
Looks good, I will take care of this and the other contribution.
/Erik
On 2018-04-27 03:31, Archana Nogriya wrote:
I am looking for reviewer and sponsor for this contribution, Is anyone who
can review this please and happy to sponsor for this contribution as
appropriate.
Hi,
"make/Docs.gmk",
This patch looks fine.
I also welcome Kim's proposal of reverting back to readdir(). We
should do this for JDK libraries too, there are still open issues
(e.g. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8166372).
Best Regards, Thomas
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:56 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
>
>
> On 0
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:01 PM, Baesken, Matthias
wrote:
>> I see tons of exports listed, most of which do not have the static
>> keyword. So, I would expect them to be exported from their compilation
>> unit, but not from the linked shared library? Am I making a thinking
>> error here?
>
> Hi Th
> I see tons of exports listed, most of which do not have the static
> keyword. So, I would expect them to be exported from their compilation
> unit, but not from the linked shared library? Am I making a thinking
> error here?
Hi Thomas , I see "a ton" of exported symbols as well when looking i
Hi Magnus,
Sorry about not including build-dev. See comments inline.
On 2018-04-25 13:06, Erik Gahlin wrote:
Greetings,
Could I have a review of 8199712: Flight Recorder
As mentioned in the preview [1] the tracing backend has been removed.
Event metadata has been consolidated into a singl
I am looking for reviewer and sponsor for this contribution, Is anyone who
can review this please and happy to sponsor for this contribution as
appropriate.
Hi,
"make/Docs.gmk", JDK_MODULES is only sorted with DOCS_MODULES, where It
should also filter-out MODULES_FILTER for javadocs modules.
Thanks Erik,
It will be great if you can sponsor for this contribution please.
Thanks and Regards
Archana Nogriya
IBM Java Runtime, Open Java Developer
IBM Hursley
Tel: Internal - 247073, External - +44 (0) 1962 81 7073
Office Mobile: 07500095480
Email: [email protected]
From: Er
On 27/04/2018 4:48 PM, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 27, 2018, at 2:11 AM, David Holmes wrote:
On 27/04/2018 3:32 PM, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 26, 2018, at 6:49 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Adding build-dev and hotspot-runtime-dev aliases.
Forwarded Message
Subject:
On 04/27/2018 12:55 AM, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
On 24 April 2018 at 20:17, Kim Barrett wrote:
On Apr 23, 2018, at 3:51 AM, Michal Vala wrote:
Hi,
following discussion "RFR: build pragma error with gcc 4.4.7"[1], I'm posting
updated patch rep
On 27/04/2018 4:20 AM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
On Apr 25, 2018, at 10:09 PM, David Holmes wrote:
On 26/04/2018 2:34 PM, Jiangli Zhou wrote:
Here is the incremental webrev with updates that incorporate all feedbacks:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jiangli/8193213_8182731/webrev_inc.02/
Looks good.
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Langer, Christoph
wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> let me cite one section from the article:
>
> --
>
> Visibility attribute and backward compatibility on AIX
>
> As we know from the previous article, on AIX, symbols are not visib
Hi Thomas,
let me cite one section from the article:
--
Visibility attribute and backward compatibility on AIX
As we know from the previous article, on AIX, symbols are not visible by
default unless we export them at the linking stage, either manuall
Hi Christoph
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Langer, Christoph
wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Look at this blog:
> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/aix/library/au-aix-symbol-visibility-part2/index.html
>
> if I understand it correctly, the xlc 12 default behavior should be like what
> we'd expect f
18 matches
Mail list logo
