On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 05:15:17 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Any non-zero exit value is acceptable. The intent here is to check that the
>> process didn't complete normally.
>
> A non-zero non-crashing value. Just wondering what that actually would be?
For instance, when we exit due to an uncaught
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 13:29:43 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/foreign/TestStubAllocFailure.java line 51:
>>
>>> 49: runInNewProcess(UpcallRunner.class, true,
>>> List.of("-XX:ReservedCodeCacheSize=3M"), List.of())
>>> 50: .shouldNotHaveExitValue(0)
>>> 51:
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 17:38:27 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [7ece9e90](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7ece9e90c0198f92cdf8d620e346c4a9832724cd)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
>
> The commit
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[7ece9e90](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7ece9e90c0198f92cdf8d620e346c4a9832724cd)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Jorn Vernee on 13 Dec 2023 and was
On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 07:08:53 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion
>> errors. The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error,
>> which the new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on
>>
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:01:25 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion
> errors. The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error,
> which the new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on
> what is
On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 12:09:50 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore
wrote:
>> Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion
>> errors. The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error,
>> which the new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:01:25 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion
> errors. The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error,
> which the new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on
> what is
On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 13:01:25 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote:
> Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion
> errors. The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error,
> which the new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on
> what is
Improve the test by being more lenient to related code cache exhaustion errors.
The important thing is that we don't terminate with a fatal error, which the
new code now checks for explicitly. The check for that is based on what is done
by
10 matches
Mail list logo
