Reland: Fix JSON parser Handle leak (previous CL 1041483004)

Reland: Fix JSON parser Handle leak (previous CL 1041483004)

R=mstarzinger@chromium.org
BUG=v8:3976
BUG=472504
LOG=y

Committed: https://crrev.com/5a93a3304cf3e32f7f49459ddb667bb2b8a4ae56
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27571}

[Erik Corry Chromium.org, 2015-04-01 14:53:51]

The CQ bit was checked by erikcorry@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 14:54:03]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051833002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 15:03:41]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 15:03:42]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  v8_presubmit on tryserver.v8 (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.v8/builders/v8_presubmit/builds/1684)

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-04-01 16:18:11]

LGTM on patch set 2, didn't look at the rest.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
File test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js:4: 
suggestion: I don't know how long this test runs, but we could try to make it
faster by lowering the stack-limit with a flag (if it still reproes then).

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-04-01 16:18:44]

Also the URL in the CL description is weird, can we drop the URL?

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-04-01 16:18:46]

Also the URL in the CL description is weird, can we drop the URL?

[Erik Corry Chromium.org, 2015-04-01 16:55:24]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
File test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js:4: 
On 2015/04/01 16:18:11, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> suggestion: I don't know how long this test runs, but we could try to make it
> faster by lowering the stack-limit with a flag (if it still reproes then).

It already runs in 0.04s, so I think it's not an issue.

[Michael Starzinger, 2015-04-01 16:56:19]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
File test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1051833002/diff/20001/test/mjsunit/regress/re...
test/mjsunit/regress/regress-472504.js:4: 
On 2015/04/01 16:55:24, Erik Corry Chromium.org wrote:
> On 2015/04/01 16:18:11, Michael Starzinger wrote:
> > suggestion: I don't know how long this test runs, but we could try to make
it
> > faster by lowering the stack-limit with a flag (if it still reproes then).
> 
> It already runs in 0.04s, so I think it's not an issue.

Acknowledged. Agreed. :)

[Erik Corry Chromium.org, 2015-04-01 16:56:53]

The CQ bit was checked by erikcorry@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 16:57:22]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1051833002/20001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 16:58:39]

Committed patchset #2 (id:20001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-01 16:58:59]

Patchset 2 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/5a93a3304cf3e32f7f49459ddb667bb2b8a4ae56
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#27571}