-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
P3
-
11, 13
-
b26
Issue | Fix Version | Assignee | Priority | Status | Resolution | Resolved In Build |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JDK-8226334 | 14 | Rahul Raghavan | P3 | Resolved | Fixed | b02 |
JDK-8228222 | 13.0.2 | Rahul Raghavan | P3 | Resolved | Fixed | b01 |
JDK-8228007 | 13.0.1 | Rahul Raghavan | P3 | Resolved | Fixed | master |
JDK-8243363 | 11.0.8-oracle | Rahul Raghavan | P3 | Resolved | Fixed | b04 |
JDK-8245018 | 11.0.8 | Rahul Raghavan | P3 | Resolved | Fixed | b04 |
The fragment is:
JVMState* LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state(AllocateArrayNode* alloc, int& saved_reexecute_sp) {
if (alloc != NULL) {
ciMethod* trap_method = alloc->jvms()->method();
int trap_bci = alloc->jvms()->bci();
if (!C->too_many_traps(trap_method, trap_bci, Deoptimization::Reason_intrinsic) &
!C->too_many_traps(trap_method, trap_bci, Deoptimization::Reason_null_check)) {
. . .
It seems, the bitwise operator '&' is used instead of the logical operator '&&'.
- backported by
-
JDK-8226334 use of & instead of && in LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state
- Resolved
-
JDK-8228007 use of & instead of && in LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state
- Resolved
-
JDK-8228222 use of & instead of && in LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state
- Resolved
-
JDK-8243363 use of & instead of && in LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state
- Resolved
-
JDK-8245018 use of & instead of && in LibraryCallKit::arraycopy_restore_alloc_state
- Resolved
- relates to
-
JDK-8225783 Incorrect use of binary operators on booleans in type.cpp
- Resolved