On 9/12/13 6:22 PM, Coleen Phillmore wrote:
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.
Ok, I will add a comment to this line to make it more clear.
<
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.
Thank you for the review!
Serguei
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
