JDK-8155108 : CompilerControl: Enable option set incorrectly
  • Type: Bug
  • Component: hotspot
  • Sub-Component: compiler
  • Affected Version: 9
  • Priority: P2
  • Status: Closed
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • OS: solaris
  • CPU: sparc
  • Submitted: 2016-04-26
  • Updated: 2017-07-26
  • Resolved: 2016-05-20
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
JDK 9
9 b122Fixed
Related Reports
Relates :  
Relates :  
Description
 stderr: [Exception in thread "main" java.lang.RuntimeException: FAILED: method public void pool.sub.Klass.method(int,java.lang.String[],java.lang.Integer,byte[],double[][]) compilable: false, but should: true on required level: 4 (assert failed: false == true)
	at jdk.test.lib.Asserts.error(Asserts.java:447)
	at jdk.test.lib.Asserts.assertTrue(Asserts.java:374)
	at jdk.test.lib.Asserts.assertEquals(Asserts.java:169)
	at jdk.test.lib.Asserts.assertEQ(Asserts.java:143)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.CompileAction.checkCompilation(CompileAction.java:83)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.CompileAction.checkCompiled(CompileAction.java:67)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.BaseAction.lambda$check$2(BaseAction.java:141)
	at java.util.ArrayList.forEach(java.base@9-internal/ArrayList.java:1352)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.BaseAction.check(BaseAction.java:139)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.BaseAction.communicate(BaseAction.java:100)
	at compiler.compilercontrol.share.actions.BaseAction.main(BaseAction.java:59)
Comments
verified by nightly testing
26-07-2017

There are no new checkins in the code that touches the relevant code. Fails on sparc only, output looks good on x86. Something else must have changed since the test fails reliably now.
28-04-2016

Is there a reason to why this wasn't labeled as integration blocker?
27-04-2016

[~neliasso], please, take a look.
26-04-2016