Re: A method with return type size_t returns negative value

2011-11-15 Thread Jing Lv
Hello, I search the E:\workspace\openjdk\jdk\src\windows\native but find nothing similar (please tell me if I miss something), so I suggest we have a quick fix for now, like: --- E:\workspace\openjdk\jdk\src\windows\native\java\io\io_util_md.h~ 2011-11-15 15:53:21.0 +0800 +++

Re: A method with return type size_t returns negative value

2011-11-15 Thread Alan Bateman
On 15/11/2011 08:09, Jing Lv wrote: Hello, I search the E:\workspace\openjdk\jdk\src\windows\native but find nothing similar (please tell me if I miss something), so I suggest we have a quick fix for now, like: I'm not around this week but I will get back to you next week on this (as I

Re: CR 6860309 - solaris timing issue on thread startup

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
Alan, On 15/11/2011 11:26 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 15/11/2011 00:56, David Holmes wrote: : 25 * @bug 4820217 6860309 As per other emails and still waiting from confirmation from Alan. I don't think the @bug should be updated for any of these test fixes. The @bug tag is intended to list the

Re: CR 6860309 - solaris timing issue on thread startup

2011-11-15 Thread Gary Adams
Where can we find the definition of the tag contents? Whichever way this discussion goes, we should update that documentation with the conclusions. On 11/15/11 4:29 PM, David Holmes wrote: Alan, On 15/11/2011 11:26 PM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 15/11/2011 00:56, David Holmes wrote: : 25 * @bug

Re: Code Review Request for 6578042

2011-11-15 Thread Alan Bateman
On 15/11/2011 19:51, Darryl Mocek wrote: I've modified the fix per feedback (thanks all). System.clearProperty now attempts to get the property with the specified key. If there is such a property, and the value is a String, remove the property and return the value removed, otherwise return

Re: CR 6860309 - solaris timing issue on thread startup

2011-11-15 Thread Alan Bateman
On 15/11/2011 21:29, David Holmes wrote: That was somewhat non-committal :) To me @bug says these are the bugs that this test is checking the fix for hence not applicable in any of the recent timing/race test fixes. It's non-committal because I don't think this has come up before, it's

Re: Passing time factor to tests run under jtreg

2011-11-15 Thread Alan Bateman
Gary - this might be something to bring up on the jtreg-use list. Ideally the tests wouldn't have any hardcoded timeouts but sometimes there isn't any other choice. -Alan On 15/11/2011 20:14, Gary Adams wrote: I've been scanning a number of the slow machine test bugs that are reported and

Re: Garbage collection race condition before final checks

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
Gary: Please do not start discussing other bugs in this thread - please keep them distinct. Remi: please add any comments to the discussion threads on those other bugs. Thanks David On 16/11/2011 12:30 AM, Rémi Forax wrote: On 11/15/2011 01:26 PM, Gary Adams wrote: Added

RE: CR 6860309 - solaris timing issue on thread startup

2011-11-15 Thread Iris Clark
Hi. The current practice may be different, but... The original intent was that every bug would either have a unit/regression test or a BugTraq keyword explaining why a test was not provided. See step 6 on this page for the list of valid keywords:

Re: Code Review Request for 6578042

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
On 16/11/2011 8:29 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: On 15/11/2011 19:51, Darryl Mocek wrote: I've modified the fix per feedback (thanks all). System.clearProperty now attempts to get the property with the specified key. If there is such a property, and the value is a String, remove the property and

Re: Passing time factor to tests run under jtreg

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
Hi Gary, On 16/11/2011 6:14 AM, Gary Adams wrote: I've been scanning a number of the slow machine test bugs that are reported and wanted to check to see if anyone has looked into time dependencies in the regression tests previously. From what I've been able to learn so far individual bugs can

Re: CR 6860309 - solaris timing issue on thread startup

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
Hi Iris, Still seems to me, based on the FAQ, http://openjdk.java.net/jtreg/faq.html that the intent is for @bug to refer to the bug that the test is testing. But as it is looking like this has been used in an ad-hoc manner anyway I'll shut up now. ;-) Cheers, David On 16/11/2011 10:47

hg: jdk8/tl/jdk: 7111579: klist starttime, renewtill, ticket etype

2011-11-15 Thread weijun . wang
Changeset: c740519fe83a Author:weijun Date: 2011-11-16 11:53 +0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/c740519fe83a 7111579: klist starttime, renewtill, ticket etype Reviewed-by: mullan ! src/share/classes/sun/security/krb5/internal/ccache/Credentials.java !

hg: jdk8/tl/jdk: 2 new changesets

2011-11-15 Thread masayoshi . okutsu
Changeset: cd6d236e863b Author:okutsu Date: 2011-11-16 12:57 +0900 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/cd6d236e863b 7111903: (tz) Windows-only: tzmappings needs update for KB2570791 Reviewed-by: peytoia ! src/windows/lib/tzmappings Changeset: 1266e72f7896 Author:

what is the most precise time I can get in JDK?

2011-11-15 Thread Weijun Wang
Hi All I need a precise time, and is currently using java.util.Date, which knows about milliseconds, but unfortunately the precision is only 10-15 milliseconds on a Windows. In fact, I don't really need it to be so correct. My requirements are: 1. It's enough correct, say, at least as

Re: what is the most precise time I can get in JDK?

2011-11-15 Thread David Holmes
Hi Max, On 16/11/2011 2:55 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: I need a precise time, and is currently using java.util.Date, which knows about milliseconds, but unfortunately the precision is only 10-15 milliseconds on a Windows. In fact, I don't really need it to be so correct. My requirements are: 1.