[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [14] Review request for 8227392: Colors with alpha are painted incorrectly on Linux, after JDK-8214579

Philip Race philip.race at oracle.com
Thu Jul 11 16:38:07 UTC 2019

There is a regression test that is supposed to catch this exact problem.

So I had looked into how we did not catch this earlier and found that in 
fact we did.
This was originally found and filed as 
The test java/awt/Color/AlphaColorTest.java was then problem listed on 

$ grep AlphaColorTest test/jdk/ProblemList.txt
java/awt/Color/AlphaColorTest.java 8224825 linux-all

So I think we can close JDK-8224825 as a duplicate of this as well as 
updating the problem list
and the test - after confirming that this backout resolves that as I 
expect it will.


On 7/11/19, 9:20 AM, Anton Litvinov wrote:
> By your request regenerated the webrev specifically against 
> (http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk13) repository.
> JDK 13 specific webrev: 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alitvinov/8227392/jdk13/webrev.00
> I confirm again, that 2 failing manual tests: "ColorTest0003", 
> "ColorTest0004" from the test 
> "api/java_awt/interactive/ColorTests.html" in JCK 13 do not fail 
> anymore after this fix is applied to JDK 13 compiled from "jdk/jdk13" 
> repository.
> "jdk/jdk13" repository does not contain any problem list mentioning 
> "api/java_awt/interactive/ColorTests.html" test from JCK 13, thus I 
> cannot de-problem list it and have no idea, where it is 
> problem-listed. I also doubt that it is problem-listed, since it is 
> manual. I added "noreg-jck" label to the bug in JBS deliberately 
> according to OpenJDK process (Section #6 from the web page 
> (http://openjdk.java.net/guide/changePlanning.html)), because this 
> back out fix does not contain a new separate regression test, while 
> this regression can be checked by running existing mentioned above 
> test from JCK package.
> If this "noreg-jck" label creates problems, I can remove it at all.
> Thank you,
> Anton
> On 11/07/2019 15:51, Philip Race wrote:
>> One more thing I just realised you should do here is de-problem list
>> the regression test that fails ... after verifying it now works,
>> updating it with this bug ID.
>> And you can remove that noreg-jck label as a consequence.
>> -phil.
>> On 7/11/19, 7:35 AM, Philip Race wrote:
>>> In such cases I like more than to be told "it would apply cleanly" 
>>> but also to see
>>> that you actually prepared the webrev against 13. This is more certain
>>> and ensures that when the fix is approved you don't accidentally 
>>> push it
>>> to the wrong repo. You have to go clone 13 and apply the patch there 
>>> anyway ...
>>> -phil.
>>> On 7/11/19, 5:44 AM, Anton Litvinov wrote:
>>>> Hello Phil,
>>>> Thank you for review and the important remark about the need to 
>>>> work with "jdk/jdk13" stabilization repository, I forgot about this 
>>>> feature of post RDP 1 phase. Today I checked the fix against 
>>>> "jdk/jdk13" repository and confirm that it resolves this bug for 
>>>> JDK 13.
>>>> Will wait for feedback or approval from any other second code 
>>>> reviewer.
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Anton
>>>> On 10/07/2019 19:55, Phil Race wrote:
>>>>> Anton,
>>>>> This looks fine except that it needs to be prepared against 13, 
>>>>> and then pushed there, not 14.
>>>>> And it will get forwarded synced from 13 to 14. That is the RDP 
>>>>> process ..
>>>>> -phil.
>>>>> On 7/10/19 5:00 AM, Anton Litvinov wrote:
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>> Could you please review the following fix for the bug. The fix is 
>>>>>> backing out of the fix for the bug JDK-8214579 which caused this 
>>>>>> JCK test failure. If this fix is accepted, then a new separate 
>>>>>> bug for readdressing the bug reported in JDK-8214579 will be filed.
>>>>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8227392
>>>>>> Webrev: 
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alitvinov/8227392/jdk14/webrev.00
>>>>>> Changeset of JDK-8214579: 
>>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/client/rev/c53905e7dc57
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>> Anton

More information about the 2d-dev mailing list