Re: RFR: JDK-8247229: jpackage tests failed due to "semop(1): encountered an error: Invalid argument"

2020-07-09 Thread alexander . matveev
Hi Alexey, Looks good. Thanks, Alexander On 7/9/20 12:49 PM, Alexey Semenyuk wrote: Hi Alexander, Agreed with your suggestion. Updated review available at [1]. - Alexey [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asemenyuk/8247229/webrev.01/webrev.01/ On 7/9/2020 12:21 AM,

RFR [16/java.xml] 8248486: SafeThread illegal access to java.lang private fields should be removed

2020-07-09 Thread huizhe . wang
Hi, Please review a patch to remove an illegal access to java.lang by the SafeThread. Note that InnocuousThread meets all the needs for SafeThread except that it also revokes permissions that the xml parser requires. This patch uses the new constructor added to Thread in JDK 9 that do not

Re: RFR 6470126 java.util.jar.Attributes#containsKey fails with Strings

2020-07-09 Thread Lance Andersen
Hi Vipin, Apologies for the delay. After looking at the bug, which is over 14 years old, the SCCS history of Attributes.java, I am reluctant to suggest we move forward with your proposed change. The key for an Attributes map entry should be an Attributes.Name object (see

Re: RFR: JDK-8247229: jpackage tests failed due to "semop(1): encountered an error: Invalid argument"

2020-07-09 Thread Andy Herrick
looks good. /Andy On 7/9/2020 3:49 PM, Alexey Semenyuk wrote: Hi Alexander, Agreed with your suggestion. Updated review available at [1]. - Alexey [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asemenyuk/8247229/webrev.01/webrev.01/ On 7/9/2020 12:21 AM, alexander.matv...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Alexey,

Re: RFR: JDK-8247229: jpackage tests failed due to "semop(1): encountered an error: Invalid argument"

2020-07-09 Thread Alexey Semenyuk
Hi Alexander, Agreed with your suggestion. Updated review available at [1]. - Alexey [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~asemenyuk/8247229/webrev.01/webrev.01/ On 7/9/2020 12:21 AM, alexander.matv...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Alexey, Looks good. Only suggestion is to move CmdlineExecutor to Executor

Re: RFR: 8245527: LDAP Cnannel Binding support for Java GSS/Kerberos

2020-07-09 Thread Alexey Bakhtin
Hello Sean, Daniel, Thank you for review I’ve added “com.sun.jndi.ldap.tls.cbtype” property into the module-info file and updated synchronisation using CompletableFuture. Also, I have added new test cases : successful and unsuccessful TLS handshake, synchronous and asynchronous TLS handshake.

Re: RFR: 8249086: JDK 15 L10n resource file update - msg drop 10

2020-07-09 Thread li . jiang
Thank you Naoto! The patch was pushed into jdk/jdk15. Thanks, Leo On 7/9/20 3:53 AM, naoto.s...@oracle.com wrote: Hi Leo, Looks good to me. Naoto On 7/8/20 10:58 AM, li.ji...@oracle.com wrote: Hi, Pls review the l10n resource files update for JDK 15 msg drop 10. Bug:

Re: RFR 15: 8217475: Unexpected StackOverflowError in "process reaper" thread

2020-07-09 Thread Roger Riggs
Hi, I raised the debugDelta to 16k and so far (12hrs) have not seen any failures. I'll push later today with 16k unless I hear any concerns. Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-process-stackoverflow-8217475-1/ Thanks, Roger On 7/9/20 4:54 AM, David Holmes wrote: Hi Roger,

Re: Build error with GCC 10 in NetworkInterface.c and k_standard.c

2020-07-09 Thread Daniel Fuchs
Hi Koichi, If you don't mind I'd prefer to keep the simple approach that will fix the warning without changing the behavior of the function. memset((char *), 0, sizeof(if2)); - strncpy(if2.ifr_name, name, sizeof(if2.ifr_name) - 1); + strncpy(if2.ifr_name, name,

Re: RFR(T): 8249097: test/lib/jdk/test/lib/util/JarBuilder.java has a bad copyright

2020-07-09 Thread David Holmes
On 9/07/2020 7:24 am, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote: Thanks for the fast review. I was surprised that jcheck -r tip didn't flag that, but... :-) jcheck doesn't check copyright lines or file headers. Cheers, David Dan On 7/8/20 5:23 PM, igor.ignat...@oracle.com wrote: LGTM, thanks for

Re: RFR 15: 8217475: Unexpected StackOverflowError in "process reaper" thread

2020-07-09 Thread David Holmes
Hi Roger, Looks good to me. Thanks, David On 9/07/2020 6:51 am, Roger Riggs wrote: Please reveiw a change to increase the size of the Process Reaper stack for debug builds. This intermittent issue can be traced to the stack shadow page size being larger in debug builds than in release

Re: Build error with GCC 10 in NetworkInterface.c and k_standard.c

2020-07-09 Thread Koichi Sakata
Hi Daniel, Thank you for your response. > > +if (sizeof(if2.ifr_name) < sizeof(name)) { > > +return -1; > > +} > > If I'm not mistaken `sizeof(name)` where name is a const char* > will always be 8 (on 64 bits architecture) - so this is probably > not doing what you want. I'm