I see the answer to my question in the mail that hasn't come out yet.
The error handling in this code relies on boolean returns in order to
throw a JVMTI_ERROR code. Maybe a comment to this effect would be good
above CLEAR_PENDING_EXCEPTION. I don't need to rereview this.<Just
understand that my suggested patches were just temporary patches to get
me past the bugs, not final fixes.
<
Yes, of course.
It is my resp. to double-check and make it final.
Yes and thank you for doing the extra work to verify that the changes
that we made weren't just workarounds and are correct and tested. The
error handling here isn't very robust but that would require some
redesign to make it so.
Thanks,
Coleen
But you deserved the credit for this investigation anyway. :)
Thanks,
Serguei
thanks,
StefanK
Thanks,
Serguei
David
On 12/09/2013 7:39 AM, serguei.spit...@oracle.com wrote:
Please, review the fix for:
bug: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=8017230
jbs: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8017230
Open webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sspitsyn/webrevs/2013/hotspot/8017230-JVMTI-MEM.1
Summary:
Handle pending exceptions instead of firing a guarantee() in the
JVMTI rewrite_cp_refs_in_method().
Testing:
UTE tests - in progress: vm.quick-pcl.testlist with limited
Metaspace memory,
nsk.jvmti.testlist,
nsk.jdi.testlist,
Jtreg java/lang/instrument
Thanks,
Serguei
