Re: RFR for bug JDK-8004807: java/util/Timer/Args.java failing intermittently in HS testing

2014-06-04 Thread Eric Wang
Hi Martin, Thanks for explanation, now I can understand why you set the DELAY_MS to 100 seconds, it is true that it prevents failure on a slow host, however, i still have some concerns. Because the test tests to schedule tasks at the time in the past, so all 13 tasks should be executed

Re: RFR 8043954: Fix behavior difference of connect() for AIX

2014-06-04 Thread Jonathan Lu
Hi Volker, Thanks for your comment! an updated webrev was made at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/JDK-8043954.2/ On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Volker Simonis volker.simo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jonathan, thanks for fixing this! I've looked at the change and it looks good to me (but I'm

Re: RFR: JDK-8044725: Bug in zlib 1.2.5 prevents inflation of some gzipped files

2014-06-04 Thread Alan Bateman
On 03/06/2014 23:34, Xueming Shen wrote: Hi, Please help review the change to upgrade the zlib bundled with jdk/jre from 1.2.5 to 1.2.8. This is mainly to address the bug fix mentioned in 1.2.8's release at zlib.net. Version 1.2.8 fixes a very rare bug in decompression. All users are

Re: RFR: 8032901: WaitForMultipleObjects() return value not handled appropriately

2014-06-04 Thread Staffan Larsen
Looks ok to me. /Staffan On 3 jun 2014, at 15:49, Aleksej Efimov aleksej.efi...@oracle.com wrote: Staffan, David, Returning back to our WaitForMultipleObjects()/WAIT_ABANDONED discussions: Thank you for your comments and remarks. I can't disagree with motivation that it's better to have

Re: RFR: 8032901: WaitForMultipleObjects() return value not handled appropriately

2014-06-04 Thread David Holmes
Me too. Thanks, David On 4/06/2014 5:23 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: Looks ok to me. /Staffan On 3 jun 2014, at 15:49, Aleksej Efimov aleksej.efi...@oracle.com wrote: Staffan, David, Returning back to our WaitForMultipleObjects()/WAIT_ABANDONED discussions: Thank you for your comments and

Re: RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

2014-06-04 Thread David Holmes
On 4/06/2014 1:38 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: I like seeing JDK as well... primarily because IDEs have the ability to show javadoc snippets when hovering over an element. It's good to see what product the version comes relates to. Yet, on the other hand, these Oracle APIs are not published under

Re: RFR (S): JDK-8039916: AnnotatedType.getType() of a Executable parameters may return wrong type

2014-06-04 Thread Paul Sandoz
On Jun 3, 2014, at 1:48 PM, Joel Borggrén-Franck joel.fra...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Can I get a review for this small fix for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8039916 Webrev here: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8039916/webrev.01/ Since this is the second issue like this

Re: RFR (S): JDK-8039916: AnnotatedType.getType() of a Executable parameters may return wrong type

2014-06-04 Thread Paul Sandoz
On Jun 4, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote: You might consider the following a more streamy way, not tested! up to you :-) private static Object[][] provider() { Stream? extends Executable s = filterData(Test.class.getMethods(), null); s =

Re: RFR: 8032901: WaitForMultipleObjects() return value not handled appropriately

2014-06-04 Thread Aleksej Efimov
Thank you David. Thank you Staffan. On 06/04/2014 01:46 PM, David Holmes wrote: Me too. Thanks, David On 4/06/2014 5:23 PM, Staffan Larsen wrote: Looks ok to me. /Staffan On 3 jun 2014, at 15:49, Aleksej Efimov aleksej.efi...@oracle.com wrote: Staffan, David, Returning back to our

Re: RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

2014-06-04 Thread Lance Andersen
Hi Henry, I know you already have some feedback on the change. The RowSet Impl changes are fine Best Lance On Jun 3, 2014, at 9:22 PM, Henry Jen henry@oracle.com wrote: Hi, In an effort to determine APIs availability in a given version, it became obvious that a consistent way to

Re: RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

2014-06-04 Thread Alan Bateman
On 04/06/2014 02:22, Henry Jen wrote: Hi, In an effort to determine APIs availability in a given version, it became obvious that a consistent way to express @since tag would be beneficial. So started with the most obvious ones, where we have various expression for JDK version, this webrev

Re: RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

2014-06-04 Thread Sean Mullan
The security specific files look fine to me. --Sean On 06/03/2014 09:22 PM, Henry Jen wrote: Hi, In an effort to determine APIs availability in a given version, it became obvious that a consistent way to express @since tag would be beneficial. So started with the most obvious ones, where we

Re: RFR 8043954: Fix behavior difference of connect() for AIX

2014-06-04 Thread Alan Bateman
On 04/06/2014 07:31, Jonathan Lu wrote: Hi Volker, Thanks for your comment! an updated webrev was made at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~luchsh/JDK-8043954.2/ Would it make sense to set errno to sockopt_arg for the case that getsockopt(SO_ERROR) returns an error? Otherwise it looks okay to me.

Re: RFR (S): JDK-8039916: AnnotatedType.getType() of a Executable parameters may return wrong type

2014-06-04 Thread Joel Borggrén-Franck
Thanks for the review Paul! I pushed the original, but I’ll experiment with your suggestion for the next set of tests. cheers /Joel On 4 jun 2014, at 12:34, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote: On Jun 4, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote: You might consider

Re: RFR (S): JDK-8039916: AnnotatedType.getType() of a Executable parameters may return wrong type

2014-06-04 Thread Remi Forax
On 06/04/2014 12:34 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote: On Jun 4, 2014, at 12:25 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote: You might consider the following a more streamy way, not tested! up to you :-) private static Object[][] provider() { Stream? extends Executable s =

[9] RFR (S): 8032400: JSR292: invokeSpecial: InternalError attempting to lookup a method

2014-06-04 Thread Vladimir Ivanov
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8032400 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8032400/webrev.00/ Consider the following hierarchy: class T1{int m() { return 1; }} class T2 extends T1 { static int m() { return 2; }} class T3 extends T2 {int m() { return

Re: RFR: 8044740: Convert all JDK versions used in @since tag to 1.n[.n] in jdk repo

2014-06-04 Thread Henry Jen
Thanks for all reviewing and feedbacks on core-libs-dev[1], I tried to respond to feedbacks with this email and send off to other mailing lists. I am wondering if jdk9-dev is the appropriate list for such a trivious but broad change, so that we can have one instead of many lists, and we still

RFR (JAXP): 8041523:Xerces Update: Serializer improvements from Xalan

2014-06-04 Thread David Li
Hi, This is an update to JAXP serialization from Apache Xalan. For details, please refer to: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8041523. Webrevs: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dli/8041523/webrev/ Summary of changes. * Changes from the Apache bug referenced in JDK-8041523 * Update

RFR: JDK-8044727: Problem reading the contents of some zip files

2014-06-04 Thread Xueming Shen
Hi, Please help review issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044727 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8044727/webrev/ cause: Regression caused by the following changeset: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/90df6756406f

Re: RFR (JAXP): 8041523:Xerces Update: Serializer improvements from Xalan

2014-06-04 Thread huizhe wang
Hi David, Good work! This is a major patch in Xalan, one last in Xalan 2.7.1. Previously, it caused many failures in JCK and SQE regression tests. I see that you've resolved those failures with the fix stated below, and getting all tests to pass. Some minor cleanup may be desirable, such

Re: RFR: JDK-8044727: Problem reading the contents of some zip files

2014-06-04 Thread Alan Bateman
On 04/06/2014 20:30, Xueming Shen wrote: Hi, Please help review issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044727 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sherman/8044727/webrev/ This case was easy to miss, the change looks good. -Alan

Re: RFR (JAXP): 8041523:Xerces Update: Serializer improvements from Xalan

2014-06-04 Thread huizhe wang
The followings are still in the webrev: - the unused AbstractTranslet: import java.util.Vector can be removed - comments in EmptySerializer and ToSAXHandler: SerializationHandler#setCdataSectionElements(java.util.Vector) The issue is SerializationHandler does not define a method

Re: RFR (JAXP): 8041523:Xerces Update: Serializer improvements from Xalan

2014-06-04 Thread David Li
I just checked and it is removed in my browser. I think you may need to clear your browser cache (or use a different browser). That's what I had to do before the changes would show up. -David On 6/4/2014 2:26 PM, huizhe wang wrote: The followings are still in the webrev: - the unused

RFR: 8044855: Add missing @since tag under java.beans.*

2014-06-04 Thread Henry Jen
Hi, Please review a trivial webrev that provides missing @since tag for elements under java.beans, This version is determined based on javadoc of 1.0.2, 1.1.8 and 1.2.2. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~henryjen/jdk9/8044855/0/webrev Cheers, Henry

Re: RFR: 8044855: Add missing @since tag under java.beans.*

2014-06-04 Thread Phil Race
Looks good to me based on what I think I know the history here. Sergey Malenkov should verify .. -phil. On 6/4/2014 3:14 PM, Henry Jen wrote: Hi, Please review a trivial webrev that provides missing @since tag for elements under java.beans, This version is determined based on javadoc of

Re: RFR (JAXP): 8041523:Xerces Update: Serializer improvements from Xalan

2014-06-04 Thread huizhe wang
Ok, Looks good. Thanks, Joe On 6/4/2014 2:44 PM, David Li wrote: I just checked and it is removed in my browser. I think you may need to clear your browser cache (or use a different browser). That's what I had to do before the changes would show up. -David On 6/4/2014 2:26 PM, huizhe wang