Skip to content

Conversation

@kevinjwalls
Copy link
Contributor

@kevinjwalls kevinjwalls commented Jun 23, 2023

Simple typo in a signature which is passed to JNU_NewObjectByName. The method clearly intentds to pass Float, but uses Double.

This code is probably not invoked, unless there is a GC MXBean with such fields. I see no straightforward way of testing this explicitly, but the change is tiny.

All tests in test/jdk/com/sun/management still pass.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8310816: GcInfoBuilder float/double signature mismatch (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14631/head:pull/14631
$ git checkout pull/14631

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14631
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14631/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14631

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14631

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14631.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 23, 2023

👋 Welcome back kevinw! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

@kevinjwalls The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • jmx
  • serviceability

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org jmx jmx-dev@openjdk.org labels Jun 23, 2023
@kevinjwalls kevinjwalls marked this pull request as ready for review June 23, 2023 19:04
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 23, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jun 23, 2023

Webrevs

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

@kevinjwalls 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:

8310816: GcInfoBuilder float/double signature mismatch

Reviewed-by: mchung, dholmes

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 4 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • dad7bd9: 8310234: Refactor Locale tests to use JUnit
  • 69f3114: 8310676: add note about unnamed module to Elements.getAllModuleElements
  • bfcca5e: 8310494: Do not include constantPool.hpp from instanceKlass.hpp
  • 0314292: 8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 23, 2023
Copy link
Member

@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems an obvious copy'n'paste error, but would result in a null entry in the array.

I can't figure out how this code is triggered by getLastGcInfo0 so can't say how to test it either.

Hard to imagine removing a null could cause a problem for code accessing the resulting array, so it seems safe in that regard.

Thanks.

@kevinjwalls
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks!

@kevinjwalls
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2023

Going to push as commit a96e92c.
Since your change was applied there have been 12 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 26, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 26, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 26, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2023

@kevinjwalls Pushed as commit a96e92c.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

integrated Pull request has been integrated jmx jmx-dev@openjdk.org serviceability serviceability-dev@openjdk.org

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants