Thanks Dan!
David
On 28/05/2020 12:52 pm, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
I'll wait for your thumbs up on the explanation.
I'm good with the explanation. Thanks!
Dan
On 5/27/20 10:08 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for taking a look.
On 28/05/2020 1:09 am, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
I'll wait for your thumbs up on the explanation.
I'm good with the explanation. Thanks!
Dan
On 5/27/20 10:08 PM, David Holmes wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for taking a look.
On 28/05/2020 1:09 am, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 5/26/20 12:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
bug:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for taking a look.
On 28/05/2020 1:09 am, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
On 5/26/20 12:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8242504/webrev/
src/hotspot/os/posix/os_posix.hpp
No comments.
On 5/26/20 12:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8242504/webrev/
src/hotspot/os/posix/os_posix.hpp
No comments.
src/hotspot/os/posix/os_posix.inline.hpp
No comments.
Hi Mark,
On 27/05/2020 2:15 am, Mark Kralj-Taylor wrote:
David,
Thanks for taking this enhancement, and making it work on the older
glibc (pre 2.17) Linux platforms currently supported by openjdk.
I like that it is a small change to split the JVM startup check on
availability of Posix
Hi Daniel,
Thanks for the review on the API side, and for the detailed
consideration of any potential spec issues - of which they are none I'm
glad to say.
Cheers,
David
On 27/05/2020 1:35 am, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi David,
This is not a review for the posix code.
Your webrev looks good
Thanks Roger!
David
On 27/05/2020 12:28 am, Roger Riggs wrote:
Looks good.
Thanks to Mark and you for the improvement and testing.
On 5/26/20 12:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8242504/webrev/
David,
Thanks for taking this enhancement, and making it work on the older glibc
(pre 2.17) Linux platforms currently supported by openjdk.
I like that it is a small change to split the JVM startup check on
availability of Posix clock_gettime/getres() APIs and then if additionally
CLOCK_MONOTONIC
Hi David,
This is not a review for the posix code.
Your webrev looks good to me and corresponds to what I expected
to see. I understand that not all operating systems / platforms
are expected to have the nano second precision, so your test
probably can't go much beyond what is currently being
Looks good.
Thanks to Mark and you for the improvement and testing.
On 5/26/20 12:59 AM, David Holmes wrote:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8242504/webrev/
This work was contributed by Mark Kralj-Taylor:
I'm not an official OpenJDK reviewer, nor would I be confident
reviewing the native code here.
Stephen
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 14:28, David Holmes wrote:
>
> On 26/05/2020 6:14 pm, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
> > AFAICT a nanosecond clock is fine from a java.time.* API perspective.
>
> Thanks
Hi Vyom,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 26/05/2020 6:44 pm, Vyom Tiwari wrote:
Hi David,
we can remove the redundant local variable(jlong result) from if block
as follows.
return jlong(ts.tv_sec) * MILLIUNITS + jlong(ts.tv_nsec) /
NANOUNITS_PER_MILLIUNIT;
Sure. I copied the code from
On 26/05/2020 6:14 pm, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
AFAICT a nanosecond clock is fine from a java.time.* API perspective.
Thanks Stephen. Is this a review or just a nod of approval? :)
Cheers,
David
-
Stephen
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 06:01, David Holmes wrote:
bug:
Hi David,
we can remove the redundant local variable(jlong result) from if block as
follows.
return jlong(ts.tv_sec) * MILLIUNITS + jlong(ts.tv_nsec) /
NANOUNITS_PER_MILLIUNIT;
Vyom
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:29 AM David Holmes
wrote:
> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
AFAICT a nanosecond clock is fine from a java.time.* API perspective.
Stephen
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 06:01, David Holmes wrote:
>
> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8242504
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8242504/webrev/
>
> This work was contributed by Mark
15 matches
Mail list logo
