On Mon, 26 May 2025 17:16:02 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> A ForkJoinPool can be created with worker threads that clear thread locals
> between tasks, thus avoiding a build up of thread locals left behind by tasks
> executed in the pool. The common pool does this. Erasing thread locals (by
> writ
This change addresses a NPE in javap when trying to print a class with
minorVersion != 0. With this change, we fall back to the methods that don't
take a `ClassFileFormatVersion` in such case.
-
Commit messages:
- fix
- test
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25569/files
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 22:30:25 GMT, Erik Gahlin wrote:
> Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
> event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
> FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
>
> Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
>
> Thanks
> E
On Fri, 30 May 2025 04:21:26 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> [JDK-8316493](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8316493) (remove caching
> fields in AbstractMap)
I tested that one over Google's codebase, and unlike this change where there
was no observable compatibility impact, I did see some breaka
> Removing incorrect assumptions and assertions from a breaking test related to
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358218
Ian Graves has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge
or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
- Merge remote-tracking branch 'up
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:14:17 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing
> entry for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which
> has been failing in our CI?
>
> tier1 testing with this change is currently in prog
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:14:17 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing
> entry for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which
> has been failing in our CI?
>
> tier1 testing with this change is currently in prog
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:14:17 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing
> entry for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which
> has been failing in our CI?
>
> tier1 testing with this change is currently in prog
Removing incorrect assumptions and assertions from a breaking test related to
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358218
-
Commit messages:
- Removing incorrect assumptions from test
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25565/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=
On Sat, 31 May 2025 16:18:59 GMT, Ian Graves wrote:
> Removing incorrect assumptions and assertions from a breaking test related to
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358218
The original test made an incorrect assumption about *MaxVector sizes that
doesn't hold across every platform. The a
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:14:17 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing
> entry for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which
> has been failing in our CI?
>
> tier1 testing with this change is currently in prog
> Implementation of Comparator.min and Comparator.max methods. Preliminary
> discussion is in this thread:
> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2025-May/145638.html
> The specification is mostly composed of Math.min/max and Collections.min/max
> specifications.
>
> The methods are
Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing entry
for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which has
been failing in our CI?
tier1 testing with this change is currently in progress to verify that this
test is excluded from execution. I'll in
On Sat, 31 May 2025 13:14:17 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which fixes the problem listing
> entry for the `jdk/incubator/vector/PreferredSpeciesTest.java#id0` test which
> has been failing in our CI?
>
> tier1 testing with this change is currently in prog
Could I have review of an enhancement that adds rate-limited sampling to Java
event, including five events in the JDK (SocketRead, SocketWrite, FileRead,
FileWrite, and JavaExceptionThrow).
Testing: test/jdk/jdk/jfr
Thanks
Erik
-
Commit messages:
- Consistent annotation
- Fix ty
On Sat, 31 May 2025 00:47:16 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> For a full explanation, see the bug report
>> [JDK-8358015](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358015).
>>
>> This PR includes three related changes:
>> * New overrides in SequencedMap view collection implementations, which
>> improve
On Thu, 29 May 2025 22:30:57 GMT, Mohamed Issa wrote:
>> Patch looks good to me, some comment included.
>
> @jatin-bhateja Please let me know if there's anything else to address.
@missa-prime The patch looks reasonable. It would have been nice if we (from
Oracle) could have tested it before in
22 matches
Mail list logo
