Webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8035782/
for bug
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035782
The file : ./jdk/src/share/classes/sun/launcher/LauncherHelper.java
has been modified so that the inner class FXHelper is not loaded
unnecessarily.
FXHelper, which is needed to
Thanks Kevin. -neil
On 4/25/2014 8:22 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
The code changes looks fine to me. Also, I ran all JavaFX unit tests
with no problems (at least none relating to launching).
-- Kevin
Neil Toda wrote:
Webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8035782/
for bug
/test/tools/launcher/FXLauncherTest.java#l360
just like jfxrt.jar is being tested now.
Kumar
On 4/25/2014 6:55 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Kevin. -neil
On 4/25/2014 8:22 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
The code changes looks fine to me. Also, I ran all JavaFX unit tests
with no problems (at least
Great. Thanks.
On 4/29/2014 9:45 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
On 4/29/2014 8:50 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Kumar. Will check these.
I have FXLauncherTest.java open right now as I type. I started
looking at it yesterday. Good
that I am looking at the right test case. Good organization
Please review Launcher change and test.
I've added to the Launcher test : FXLauncherTest.java
The test will now check that LauncherHelper$FXHelper is not loaded for
non-JavaFX class and jar files.
webrev.02 contains only review suggestions from webrev.01 and the new
test class.
to have you fix this.
-26 * @bug 8001533 8004547
+26 * @bug 8001533 8004547 8035782
other than that it looks good, I can push this with the above change.
Anyone else have any concerns with this change before I push ?
Thanks
Kumar
On 4/30/2014 1:47 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Please review
can push this with the above change.
Anyone else have any concerns with this change before I push ?
Thanks
Kumar
On 4/30/2014 1:47 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Please review Launcher change and test.
I've added to the Launcher test : FXLauncherTest.java
The test will now check that LauncherHelper
have any concerns with this change before I push ?
Thanks
Kumar
On 4/30/2014 1:47 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Please review Launcher change and test.
I've added to the Launcher test : FXLauncherTest.java
The test will now check that LauncherHelper$FXHelper is not loaded for
non-JavaFX class and jar
Launcher support for modified Native Memory Tracking mechanism in JVM in
JDK9.
Webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8042469/webrev-03/
bug : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8042469
CCC : http://ccc.us.oracle.com/8042469
Thanks.
-neil
I'd mention it.
Sent from my phone
On Jun 19, 2014 8:30 PM, Neil Toda neil.t...@oracle.com
mailto:neil.t...@oracle.com wrote:
Launcher support for modified Native Memory Tracking mechanism in
JVM in JDK9.
Webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8042469/webrev-03/
http
Thanks Joe. It would have checked for NULL for me.
I'll use the JLI wrapper.
-neil
On 6/20/2014 4:04 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Memory allocation in the launcher should use one of the JLI_MemAlloc
wrappers, if possible.
-Joe
On 06/20/2014 09:50 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
They should complain
to post another iteration ?
Kumar
On 6/20/2014 4:27 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Joe. It would have checked for NULL for me.
I'll use the JLI wrapper.
-neil
On 6/20/2014 4:04 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Memory allocation in the launcher should use one of the JLI_MemAlloc
wrappers, if possible.
-Joe
, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
Neil,
Generally looks good, yes JLI_* functions must be used, I missed that
one.
Are you going to post another iteration ?
Kumar
On 6/20/2014 4:27 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Joe. It would have checked for NULL for me.
I'll use the JLI wrapper.
-neil
On 6/20/2014 4
info);
118 }
On 6/24/2014 2:28 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
New webrev-05 with Kumar's comments except for the C'ish style.
Explained below.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8042469/webrev-05/
105 : DONE
146: DONE
168: DONE
106: Your suggestion was the way I had originally coded
, Zhengyu Gu wrote:
Hi Neil,
I tried out this patch with my hotspot, it does not work.
The reason is that, the environment variable is setup too late, it has
to be set before it launches JavaVM (before calling LoadJavaVM()) method.
Thanks,
-Zhengyu
On 6/25/2014 1:58 PM, Neil Toda wrote
#696 to #681, you will see the test to fail.
Linux putenv document says:
*putenv*is very widely available, but it might or might not copy its
argument, risking memory leaks.
Thanks,
-Zhengyu
On 6/25/2014 4:40 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Okay, Very glad you checked. It really does need to go
Please review this launcher change.
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046545
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8046545/webrev-01/
Summary:
Introduce a set of macros for launcher to be used to check for certain
conditions after
return from select functions.
be an error or a null value. I suggest making this change to reflect
this.
Thanks
Kumar
On 7/18/2014 9:53 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
Please review this launcher change.
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8046545
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8046545/webrev-01/
Summary
(JNI_RETURN, RETURN_VALUE);
Kumar
On 7/18/2014 10:40 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Kumar. Yes, misspoke here. Will correct the comment.
On 7/18/2014 10:35 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote:
Neil,
The fix looks good. However there is an inaccuracy in the comment:
+ * Normally, JNI calls do not return
.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8046545/webrev-02/
Thanks
-neil
On 7/21/2014 9:31 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
Hi Kumar
Actually, the null check macros have different parameters.
NCRV_return_value is an integer.
RETURNVALUE in CHECK_JNI_RETURN is a macro, which allows us to have
only the two macros
also just
send e-mail to 2d-...@openjdk.java.net and ask for a volunteer (I am
not a Reviewer for 2D).
-- Kevin
Neil Toda wrote:
I'm hoping some one will volunteer to be a 2d reviewer so we can
satisfy jcheck requirement for a 2d
review for this 8u patch.
It is a very simple set
for RETURN(N)
#define RETURN(N) return N
-neil
On 7/23/2014 4:12 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hi Neil,
On 07/23/2014 03:50 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
I'm hoping some one will volunteer to be a 2d reviewer so we can
satisfy jcheck requirement for a 2d
review for this 8u patch.
It is a very simple set
Got it backwards. Will use
#define RETURN(N) return (N)
On 7/24/2014 9:06 AM, Neil Toda wrote:
Thanks Joe and Kumar
It would be better in terms of usability.
I'll have these three macros:
CHECK_JNI_RETURN_0
CHECK_JNI_RETURN_VOID
CHECK_JNI_RETURN_VALUE
With this change, I
suggested before.
Kumar
Hi Neil,
On 07/23/2014 03:50 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
I'm hoping some one will volunteer to be a 2d reviewer so we can
satisfy jcheck requirement for a 2d
review for this 8u patch.
It is a very simple set of macros and a couple of applications that
we hope to use going
Please view this patch cleaning up lint rawtypes, cast, and unchecked
warnings in sun.tools.*
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8044867/webrev-04/
jbs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8044867
Thanks
-neil
Thanks Joe.
-neil
On 7/31/2014 4:58 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Looks fine Neil; thanks,
-Joe
On 07/31/2014 02:33 PM, Neil Toda wrote:
Please view this patch cleaning up lint rawtypes, cast, and unchecked
warnings in sun.tools.*
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ntoda/8044867/webrev-04
26 matches
Mail list logo
