Merge jdk-23+37 #156
Merge jdk-23+37 #156
Conversation
…inalization Reviewed-by: cjplummer, amenkov
…va thread info for JNI Local Ref Reviewed-by: kevinw, dholmes
Reviewed-by: jiangli, erikj
Reviewed-by: chagedorn, thartmann
…he AST Reviewed-by: asotona
Reviewed-by: asotona
….console() hangs jshell Reviewed-by: prappo
Reviewed-by: liach, jlahoda
8312111: open/test/jdk/java/awt/Robot/ModifierRobotKey/ModifierRobotKeyTest.java fails on ubuntu 23.04 Reviewed-by: prr
…_inMemoryCompilation_keep_cl failed with Full gc happened. Test was useless. Reviewed-by: tschatzl, ayang
Reviewed-by: redestad, liach
Reviewed-by: alanb, dfuchs
…ntryOrNull Reviewed-by: asotona
Reviewed-by: mgronlun, alanb
Reviewed-by: rcastanedalo
Reviewed-by: asotona
Reviewed-by: aph, jpai, mcimadamore
…erated cycle Reviewed-by: kdnilsen, shade, ysr
…JDK-8328181 Reviewed-by: thartmann
…classObject Reviewed-by: amenkov, sspitsyn
…ould pass current thread explicitly Reviewed-by: sspitsyn, cjplummer
Reviewed-by: lmesnik
… finalization Reviewed-by: cjplummer, sspitsyn
… linux Reviewed-by: lmesnik, sspitsyn
… processing Reviewed-by: vromero
…nent 8331680: NumberFormat is missing some bad exponent strict parse cases Reviewed-by: naoto
Reviewed-by: amenkov, alanb
…g packaging tools in the system Reviewed-by: almatvee
Reviewed-by: almatvee
… transformed Reviewed-by: vromero, jjg
… Unexpected message Reviewed-by: jpai Backport-of: c798316
Reviewed-by: kvn Backport-of: 005fb67
…aceIdEpoch::this_epoch_method_and_class_bits()))) != 0))) failed: invariant Reviewed-by: egahlin Backport-of: 67979eb
Reviewed-by: jvernee Backport-of: b9b0b85
Reviewed-by: mcimadamore Backport-of: 2b0adfc
Reviewed-by: shade Backport-of: ee82346
Reviewed-by: alanb, iris
…Time.java fails on alinux3 Reviewed-by: alanb Backport-of: 7baddc2
Reviewed-by: prr Backport-of: 374fca0
Reviewed-by: dholmes, sspitsyn Backport-of: 3babffd
Reviewed-by: jlu, prappo, naoto, vromero
Reviewed-by: jpai, alanb Backport-of: 8bd3cd5
…tion Reviewed-by: dholmes
…ent with their setVerbose methods Reviewed-by: kevinw Backport-of: 9775d57
Added tag jdk-23+37 for changeset 9ad2e63
|
👋 Welcome back rvansa! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
|
@rvansa This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be: You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been no new commits pushed to the ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
|
Some of the test failures (on x86_64 and macos) are intermittent failures, should be fixed independently. |
openjdk
bot
added
ready
Webrevs |
|
Mailing list message from Anton Kozlov on crac-dev: On 8/30/24 2:26 PM, Radim Vansa wrote: The PR is too big for github to visualize it. I'm reviewing the difference with jdk-23+37: diff --git a/make/autoconf/Makefile.template b/make/autoconf/Makefile.template -# This Makefile was generated by configure @DATE_WHEN_CONFIGURED@ This seems to be mis-merge. --- commit 20975f6 Build jdk/test/lib/containers/docker for tests diff --git a/make/test/BuildTestLib.gmk b/make/test/BuildTestLib.gmk public DockerRunOptions addDockerOpts(String... opts) { The reason for this change is not clear, it seems to be this PR specific, but it is not CRaC-specific. Better to be done as a follow-up change. In the rest, LGTM. Thank you! -- Anton |
|
@rvansa This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration! |
3 similar comments
|
@rvansa This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration! |
|
@rvansa This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration! |
|
@rvansa This pull request has been inactive for more than 4 weeks and will be automatically closed if another 4 weeks passes without any activity. To avoid this, simply add a new comment to the pull request. Feel free to ask for assistance if you need help with progressing this pull request towards integration! |
This merges the release candidate tag 23+37 into CRaC, expecting that we will baseline on 23 soon.
Most of the conflicts to resolve were trivial, one place worth attention is
LinuxAttachListener+LinuxAttachOperationthat were refactored in CRaC and in upstream renamed toPosixAttachListener+PosixAttachOperation. Second set of conflicts appeared in CPU features handling.Progress
Reviewing
Using
gitCheckout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/crac.git pull/156/head:pull/156$ git checkout pull/156Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/156$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/crac.git pull/156/headUsing Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 156View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 156Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/crac/pull/156.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment