On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 07:05:38 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I think the only way to make sense of this is to actually set up scenarios
> where we have different threads contending on entry, different threads
> waiting and different threads re-entering after being notified, and see what
> values
> The implementation of the JVM TI `GetObjectMonitorUsage` does not match the
> spec.
> The function returns the following structure:
>
>
> typedef struct {
> jthread owner;
> jint entry_count;
> jint waiter_count;
> jthread* waiters;
> jint notify_waiter_count;
>
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 20:53:53 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> The fix adds check that merged constant pool does not overflow u2 (two-byte
> unsigned).
> The check is added after merging `the_class` and `scratch_class` constant
> pools, but before rewriting constant pool references.
>
> testing:
> -
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 20:42:14 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix adds check that merged constant pool does not overflow u2 (two-byte
>> unsigned).
>> The check is added after merging `the_class` and `scratch_class` constant
>> pools, but before rewriting constant pool references.
>>
>> testing:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 15:29:47 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
>> Yes, I've figured this out now. Thank you for pointing to it.
>> It feels, the counts can be calculated correctly without touching the
>> implementation of `current_pending_monitor()`, `current_waiting_monitor()`,
>> `_contensions`
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 03:27:54 GMT, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRedefineClasses.cpp line 1828:
>>
>>> 1826: // ensure merged constant pool size does not overflow u2
>>> 1827: if (merge_cp_length > 0x) {
>>> 1828: return JVMTI_ERROR_INTERNAL;
>>
>> Doesn't
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 20:42:14 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
>> The fix adds check that merged constant pool does not overflow u2 (two-byte
>> unsigned).
>> The check is added after merging `the_class` and `scratch_class` constant
>> pools, but before rewriting constant pool references.
>>
>> testing:
> The fix adds check that merged constant pool does not overflow u2 (two-byte
> unsigned).
> The check is added after merging `the_class` and `scratch_class` constant
> pools, but before rewriting constant pool references.
>
> testing:
> - sanity tier1;
> - all
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:26:30 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> There are several .sh tests which use ${TESTVMOPTS} only. Updated them to
> use ${TESTJAVAOPTS} also.
> Tested by running them with different options and tier1.
@kevinjwalls, @plummercj Thank you for review.
I run tests with all
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 18:22:47 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
>> Alright, sounds good to me. :) Thanks again for taking a look!
>>
>>> One other thing - JDK-8226919 looks like the original bug for this, logged
>>> a few years back, so if this fixes both, the record should show that it
>>> fixes that
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:26:30 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> There are several .sh tests which use ${TESTVMOPTS} only. Updated them to
> use ${TESTJAVAOPTS} also.
> Tested by running them with different options and tier1.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 3ebe6c19
Author:
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 05:38:32 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> The tests
> javax/management/ImplementationVersion/ImplVersionTest.java
> javax/management/remote/mandatory/connection/DefaultAgentFilterTest.java
> javax/management/remote/mandatory/version/ImplVersionTest.java
>
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 10:47:22 GMT, Sebastian Lövdahl wrote:
> 8226919: attach in linux hangs due to permission denied accessing
> /proc/pid/root
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: ac4607ed
Author:Sebastian Lövdahl
Committer: Kevin Walls
URL:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 18:17:58 GMT, Sebastian Lövdahl wrote:
> I'll still fix this. So, I should change the PR title to match JDK-8226919,
> and issue an `/issue remove` command for JDK-8307977, is that correct?
Yes exactly, thanks.
-
PR Comment:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 10:47:22 GMT, Sebastian Lövdahl wrote:
> 8307977: jcmd and jstack broken for target processes running with elevated
> capabilities
Alright, sounds good to me. :) Thanks again for taking a look!
> One other thing - JDK-8226919 looks like the original bug for this, logged a
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:35:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
> JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the
> same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
>
On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 10:47:22 GMT, Sebastian Lövdahl wrote:
> 8307977: jcmd and jstack broken for target processes running with elevated
> capabilities
Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).
Hi, looking at it again:
Getting a target's current directory, you have to use /proc/PID/cwd, or you
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:26:30 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> There are several .sh tests which use ${TESTVMOPTS} only. Updated them to
> use ${TESTJAVAOPTS} also.
> Tested by running them with different options and tier1.
The changes look fine. What testing have you done? Would be good to test
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 13:46:40 GMT, Markus Grönlund wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> The following adjustments fix the intermittent issues with incomplete tag
> sets for a chunk. The situations are pretty subtle:
>
> 1. A situation can occur where an event is emitted during the event
> instrumentation
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:42:02 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
>> JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have
>> the same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get
>> spurious
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:35:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
> JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the
> same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
>
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:35:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
> JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the
> same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
>
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 13:35:55 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
> JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the
> same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
>
This is an attempt to finally implement the idea brought forward in
JDK-8295729: Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the
same whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
trailing whitespace changes or leading tabs instead of spaces.
With Skara
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 07:44:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 23:26:30 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
> There are several .sh tests which use ${TESTVMOPTS} only. Updated them to
> use ${TESTJAVAOPTS} also.
> Tested by running them with different options and tier1.
Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).
-
PR Review:
On Fri, 9 Feb 2024 05:31:17 GMT, Yifeng Jin wrote:
>> These two files (`GCCause.java` and `gcCause.hpp`) should be in sync by
>> design, see comments in these two files. However, some recent changes (e.g.
>> [JDK-8240239](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8240239)) to `gcCause.hpp`
>> were
27 matches
Mail list logo
