hg: jdk7/hotspot-comp/hotspot: 6855164: SIGSEGV during compilation of method involving loop over CharSequence.

[changpeng.fang]

Changeset: 0f2d888530e7
Author:    cfang
Date:      2009-07-02 16:18 -0700
URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/hotspot-comp/hotspot/rev/0f2d888530e7

6855164: SIGSEGV during compilation of method involving loop over CharSequence.
Summary: Don not split a block if it contains a FastLockNode with a PhiNode input.
Reviewed-by: kvn, never

! src/share/vm/opto/loopopts.cpp

[Ismael Juma]

Hi,

<changpeng.fang@...> writes:
>
> Changeset: 0f2d888530e7
> Author:    cfang
> Date:      2009-07-02 16:18 -0700
> URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/hotspot-comp/hotspot/rev/0f2d888530e7
>
> 6855164: SIGSEGV during compilation of method involving loop over CharSequence.

Thanks for fixing this.

Is there a reason why the test case in the bug report was not included? I
remember something in the past about Sun not having the rights to include test
cases submitted through the bug tracker, so maybe that's the reason. If so, can
something be done to allow the submitter to specify that he or she is ok with
Sun including the test case?

I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people want the test cases to be
included so that regressions don't occur.

Best,
Ismael

[changpeng.fang]

Ismael Juma wrote:

> Hi,
>
> <changpeng.fang@...> writes:
>  
>> Changeset: 0f2d888530e7
>> Author:    cfang
>> Date:      2009-07-02 16:18 -0700
>> URL:       http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/hotspot-comp/hotspot/rev/0f2d888530e7
>>
>> 6855164: SIGSEGV during compilation of method involving loop over CharSequence.
>>    
>
> Thanks for fixing this.
>
> Is there a reason why the test case in the bug report was not included? I
> remember something in the past about Sun not having the rights to include test
> cases submitted through the bug tracker, so maybe that's the reason. If so, can
> something be done to allow the submitter to specify that he or she is ok with
> Sun including the test case?
>
> I am pretty sure that the vast majority of people want the test cases to be
> included so that regressions don't occur.
>
>  

Hi, Ismael:

Thanks for pointing this out. I should have included the test case in
the bug report with the fix. The test case seems to be
the perfect candidate for regression test. I will add the test case soon
(unless someone tells me this is not
allowed :-) )

Thanks and have a nice weekend!

Changpeng


> Best,
> Ismael
>
>  

[Ismael Juma]

Hi Changpeng,

Changpeng Fang <Changpeng.Fang@...> writes:
> Thanks for pointing this out. I should have included the test case in
> the bug report with the fix. The test case seems to be
> the perfect candidate for regression test. I will add the test case soon
> (unless someone tells me this is not
> allowed  )

Great, thanks.

> Thanks and have a nice weekend!

And you. :)

Best,
Ismael