I judge this to be more serious than P3, even though correctness is not affected, since production services have noticed unacceptable performance regressions.
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Sean Mullan <sean.mul...@oracle.com> wrote: > The fix looks ok to me, but I would also like Valerie to review it since > she is more familiar with this code. > > As far as JDK 9 goes, we are in Rampdown Phase 1. According to the rules > [1], since it is a P3 and is new in JDK 9 we should try to fix this issue > if we can. > > Were you offering to push this fix or did you want someone in the Security > group to take this over from you? > > --Sean > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/rdp-1 > > > On 1/30/17 2:24 PM, Chuck Rasbold wrote: > >> Here's a tiny fix for an unintended, but clear, performance regression. >> >> I'm not familiar of the current criteria for jdk9 changes. Please advise >> this mostly HotSpot engineer if / how to move forward. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rasbold/8173581/webrev.00/ >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rasbold/8173581/webrev.00/> >> >