Review Request: Zero and Shark fixes
gbenson at redhat.com
Wed Mar 30 07:55:24 PDT 2011
Christian Thalinger wrote:
> On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:38 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> > On 30 March 2011 15:21, Christian Thalinger
> > <christian.thalinger at oracle.com> wrote:
> > > Nothing's pushed yet so we still can talk about and change it.
> > > What exactly do you want to split?
> > >
> > > -- Christian
> > Thanks. From the webrev, there seem to be at least three changes:
> > 1. Makefile changes which make sure the Shark files are once again
> > compiled (and which I believe would need to be reviewed by Kelly
> > anyway)
> > 2. The trivial #ifndef addition which fixes a regression
> > introduced by the recent HotSpot security fix.
> > 3. The fix for the bug Gary mentioned which appears to mean API
> > changes (I don't completely understand this bit).
> > The first two have been tested in IcedTea6 and correspond to
> > regressions introduced by identifiable changesets.
> > I'm not sure of the impact of the third.
> > The hs20 stable branch needs 1. but does not need 2. at present
> > as it doesn't have the security fix to my knowledge.
> > I'd prefer they were added separately, but I could live with 1 & 2
> > being combined, provided the security fix went into OpenJDK6 first.
> > The build changes do need to be reviewed by Kelly:
> > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/build-dev/2011-February/004034.html
> > so it would make sense to have 1 separate in that respect.
> > I would definitely like to see 3 separated as it's new and (AFAIK)
> > largely untested.
> Alright, let's split the work :-)
> Andrew, can you take care of 1. and send it to build-dev? I take
> the rest of the patch (2. and 3.) and push it as the one CR I
> created. I don't think it makes much sense to have an extra CR for
Would you like me to make new webrevs?
More information about the hotspot-compiler-dev