Re: RFR: 8210416: [linux] Poor StrictMath performance due to non-optimized compilation

On 2018-09-06 10:29, Severin Gehwolf wrote: On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 09:55 -0700, Erik Joelsson wrote: Thanks, Erik. GCC supports -ffp-contract since 4.6. Clang has -ffp- contract too. Question is beginning from which version. That's why I'd expect for those flags to work on linux. Is there anythi

Re: [12] RFR: 8210142: java.util.Calendar.clone() doesn't respect sharedZone flag

Looks good, thanks for the update. Roger On 9/5/18 5:10 PM, [email protected] wrote: Hi Roger, I updated the fix to share the zone only if the sharedZone is true. Here is the updated webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~naoto/8210142/webrev.01/ Naoto On 9/5/18 7:07 AM, Roger Riggs wro

Re: RFR: 8210416: [linux] Poor StrictMath performance due to non-optimized compilation

On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 09:55 -0700, Erik Joelsson wrote: > On 2018-09-06 03:12, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi David, > > > > On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 07:32 +1000, David Holmes wrote: > > > Hi Severin, > > > > > > Might as well raise this here too as it's really a build philosophy > > > issue. Shouldn

Re: RFR: 8210416: [linux] Poor StrictMath performance due to non-optimized compilation

On 2018-09-06 03:12, Severin Gehwolf wrote: Hi David, On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 07:32 +1000, David Holmes wrote: Hi Severin, Might as well raise this here too as it's really a build philosophy issue. Shouldn't flags like -ffp-contract=off (and the existing AIX -qfloat=nomaf) be toolchain specifi

Re: RFR(L/M) : 8210112 : remove jdk.testlibrary.ProcessTools

JC, thanks for your review! Core-libs team, as the majority of changed tests are core-libs tests, I'd really appreciate if someone from core-libs (preferably a Reviewer) could review the patch. for the record, [1] is the latest version of webrev. [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~iignatyev//8210

Re: [PATCH] JDK-7033681 - Improve the documentation of Arrays.asList

On 06/09/18 1:24 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Yes you are right @apinote is aproperiate section (was confusing it with > implnote). > > Still think a ‚literal specified list‘ is no longer a good (as in canonical) > usecase for that method. > > I used it in the past often to get a List for using

Re: RFR - JDK-8200434 - String::align, String::indent (code review)

Revised webrev at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jlaskey/8200434/webrev-01/index.html Thank you Roger, — Jim > On Sep 5, 2018, at 5:07 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > > Hi Jim, > > Overall it looks fine. Some quibbles on the wording

RE: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR JDK-8209786: gcc 7.3 compiler errors on zLinux

Yes, that's fine. I can sponsor it tomorrow. I'm not in the office today. Best regards, Goetz. > -Original Message- > From: Andrew Leonard > Sent: Donnerstag, 6. September 2018 12:29 > To: Magnus Ihse Bursie ; Lindenmaier, Goetz > > Cc: 2d-dev <[email protected]>; Brian Burkha

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR JDK-8209786: gcc 7.3 compiler errors on zLinux

Thanks Magnus, Hi Goetz, we have agreement from both library owners, so I think we're good now? Thanks Andrew Andrew Leonard Java Runtimes Development IBM Hursley IBM United Kingdom Ltd Phone internal: 245913, external: 01962 815913 internet email: [email protected] From: Magnus

Re: RFR: 8210416: [linux] Poor StrictMath performance due to non-optimized compilation

Hi Joe, On Wed, 2018-09-05 at 12:15 -0700, joe darcy wrote: > On 9/5/2018 6:12 AM, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Cross-posting this review-thread on core-libs-dev and build-dev as > > this > > is a build change, but affects fdlibm which is core-libs. > > > > With JDK-8170153 optimizatio

Re: RFR: 8210416: [linux] Poor StrictMath performance due to non-optimized compilation

Hi David, On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 07:32 +1000, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Severin, > > Might as well raise this here too as it's really a build philosophy > issue. Shouldn't flags like -ffp-contract=off (and the existing AIX > -qfloat=nomaf) be toolchain specific rather than platform specific? Loo

Re: [12] RFR 8042902: Test java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java fails intermittently

Thank you, Chris H. :) Regards, Chris Y. > On 6 Sep 2018, at 4:05 PM, Chris Hegarty wrote: > > >> On 6 Sep 2018, at 09:00, Chris Yin wrote: >> >> Please have a review for below minor change to test >> java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java, thanks >> >> The bug

Re: [12] RFR 8042902: Test java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java fails intermittently

> On 6 Sep 2018, at 09:00, Chris Yin wrote: > > Please have a review for below minor change to test > java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java, thanks > > The bug has a long history, so a quick summary and explanation here, the > issue which caused test failure befo

[12] RFR 8042902: Test java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java fails intermittently

Please have a review for below minor change to test java/net/Inet6Address/serialize/Inet6AddressSerializationTest.java, thanks The bug has a long history, so a quick summary and explanation here, the issue which caused test failure before 2016 should already been fixed, so this fix change is fo

Re: [PATCH] JDK-7033681 - Improve the documentation of Arrays.asList

Yes you are right @apinote is aproperiate section (was confusing it with implnote). Still think a ‚literal specified list‘ is no longer a good (as in canonical) usecase for that method. I used it in the past often to get a List for using toString() on it, but I guess even for that case List.of

Re: [PATCH] Simplification of TreeMap

Hi Sergey and Sergey ;), that's totally correct! Serialization really is a beast sometimes, you have to take care that instances that have been serialized even with Java 1.2 still get deserialized correctly in the current version. So it's not sufficient to only look at the constructors when the c

Re: [PATCH] JDK-7033681 - Improve the documentation of Arrays.asList

Hello Bernd, Thank you for the review and sorry about the delayed response. Comments inline. On 29/08/18 4:26 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote: > Hello, > > Not an Reviewer But just wanted to give a short Feedback: I like the > new Version it is really helpful.  > > However I wonder if the usage examp