(original) (raw)

On 2013-02-01 12:17, Stefan Karlsson wrote:

On 2013-02-01 12:11, serguei.spitsyn@oracle.com wrote:

On 2/1/13 1:57 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote:

On

2013-02-01 10:22, serguei.spitsyn@oracle.com
wrote:

Nice test!

It looks good.

Thanks for reviewing!

As the original bug and the test are non-trivial, it'd
make sense to add a comment to

the class RedefineMethodInBacktraceApp and explain a
little bit what the test is doing,

and what behavior is expected.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8006506/webrev.04/




Tell me if you think this is good enough.

It is good.



Nit: it'd be enough if it is more specific. :)

This method is a key point:

 90 private static void touchRedefinedMethodInBacktrace(Throwable throwable) {
 91 throwable.getStackTrace();
 92 }

Is it true that the test expects the getStackTrace() does not
crash nor

throw an exception which would happen if the old/obsolete
method is gc'ed?

I see. I'll add a comment that we shouldn't crash.

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8006506/webrev.05/



StefanK

Thanks,

StefanK

Thanks,

Serguei

thanks,

StefanK

Thanks,

Sergueri





On 2/1/13 12:13 AM, Stefan Karlsson wrote:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~stefank/8006506/webrev.03/

1. Reverted the ProblemList change, since the fix has
   already propagaged to jdk8/tl
   
2. Renamed do_redefine -> doRedefine
   
3. Updated the .sh file with the bug number of the
   original CR instead of the test CR.
   
   thanks,
   StefanK
   
   On 2013-01-22 14:11, Stefan Karlsson wrote:
   

   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/\~stefank/8006506/webrev.00/
   
   This test provokes the JVM crash described in bug: JDK-7174978\.
   
   I intend to push this to:
   http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk
   
   thanks,
   StefanK