RFR(XS) 8076311: Java 9 process negative MaxTenuringThreshold in different way than Java 8 (original) (raw)

Dmitry Dmitriev dmitry.dmitriev at oracle.com
Sun Apr 5 09:29:35 UTC 2015

Jon, thank you for review and sponsorship!

In review request I mention that I don't OpenJDK Author, but at Friday I got OpenJDK Author for JDK 9, so I will sent you a final patch with my commit.

Thanks, Dmitry

On 04.04.2015 0:53, Jon Masamitsu wrote:

Dmitry,

Change looks good. Reviewed. I can sponsor the push. Send the final patch once you have all your reviews. Jon

On 4/3/2015 2:49 AM, Dmitry Dmitriev wrote: Hello,

Please review this small fix for JDK-8076311. Also, I need a sponsor for this fix, who can push it, because I'm not have a OpenJDK name. Fix for JDK-6521376 add explicit processing of MaxTenuringThreshold XX option. When bad value for MaxTenuringThreshold is passed(e.g. negative value for unsigned option "-XX:MaxTenuringThreshold=-1"), then function print warning and continue execution with default value(0). This behavior differs from Java 8. Java 8 process this situation in common way for unsigned options, i.e. print waring and reports a error. So, I fix Java 9 MaxTenuringThreshold option processing. Also, I add new test case to the test/gc/arguments/TestInitialTenuringThreshold.java to test this situation. Open webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ctornqvi/webrev/8076311/webrev.00/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ectornqvi/webrev/8076311/webrev.00/> JBS bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8076311 Tested: JPRT Thank you, Dmitry

More information about the hotspot-dev mailing list