JDK-8265441: IGV: select block nodes by clicking on it

[tobiasholenstein]

In "Cluster nodes into blocks" mode, it is now possible to select all nodes in a block by simply double-clicking in the block. The attached images illustrate the new behavior, after double-clicking on block B10. Similarly, the current node selection can be extended with all nodes of a block when holding the Ctrl/Cmd-key and double-clicking on a block.

Overview selection

new selection modes in bold. We refer to B4/B10 as blocks, and 86, 87, 88, ... as nodes

no key pressed

• click on single node : select single node, unselect all other nodes
• click on edge : select src/dest nodes, unselect all other nodes
• double-click on block : select all nodes in block, unselect all other nodes
• double-click outside of node/block : unselect all nodes

holding down Ctrl/Cmd

• click on single node : add node to current selection
• click on edge : invert the selection of src/dest nodes
• double-click on block : add all nodes in block to current selection
• draw selection rectangle : invert the selection of all nodes in rectangle
  • select unselected nodes, unselect selected nodes

Implementation

The main functionality was implemented by extending BlockWidget with DoubleClickHandler and adding methods handleDoubleClick / addToSelection. We also needed to replace setSelectedNodes with clearSelectedNodes and addSelectedNodes in InputGraphProvider and the corresponding methods in EditorTopComponent. All code that used setSelectedNodes needed to be adjusted accordingly.

In order for the DoubleClickHandler in BlockWidget to work, we needed to extend selectAction in DiagramScene to invert the selection of the nodes in the rectangle (the symmetricDiff set).

---

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-8265441: IGV: select block nodes by clicking on it

Reviewers

• Roberto Castañeda Lozano (@robcasloz - Reviewer)
• Tobias Hartmann (@TobiHartmann - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/10854/head:pull/10854
$ git checkout pull/10854

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/10854
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/10854/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 10854

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 10854

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10854.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back tholenstein! 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]

@tobiasholenstein The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

• hotspot-compiler

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

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (ff676a64)

[robcasloz]

Great functionality, thanks!

[openjdk]

@tobiasholenstein 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:

8265441: IGV: select block nodes by clicking on it

Reviewed-by: rcastanedalo, thartmann

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 31 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• e173fd7: 8295885: GHA: Bump gcc versions
• b2878c9: 8295710: remove os::dll_file_extension
• e3a5a34: 8295767: Remove unused fields in sun.awt.geom.Edge
• 324bec1: 8295863: JFR: Use expected size for Maps and Sets
• 3bd3caf: 8294486: Remove vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/ tests ported to serviceability/jvmti.
• fec6174: 8295816: jdwp jck tests failing with "FATAL ERROR in native method: JDWP SetTag, jvmtiError=JVMTI_ERROR_WRONG_PHASE(112)"
• e0c2930: 8295282: Use Zicboz/cbo.zero to zero-out memory on RISC-V
• d393e05: 8294989: ResourceBundle naming convention issue in JdbcRowSetResourceBundle.java
• 0caea81: 8295895: build error after JDK-8279366
• ee0dec8: 8295838: Document why we do not print Code Cache Roots phase in G1 logging
• ... and 21 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ac6f185eec9efb063bf271516df6529b732a043...master

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.

[TobiHartmann]

Should un-select by double clicking on a block that has selected nodes also work?

[tobiasholenstein]

Should un-select by double clicking on a block that has selected nodes also work?

Hi @TobiHartmann
Thanks for suggestion!

I decided to leave this out for the following reason:

• What happens if some of the nodes in e.g. B10 are selected by double-clicking? Either unselect them all or select them all. If a user double-clicks on a node and then node by node unselects them all - When now double clicking again, should we select or unselect all? The user probably expects that all nodes get selected since all are unselected, but the "select state" of the block would still be selected from the last double-click. Of course we could update the block state for every change in selection that we make. But I think it makes things complicated.
  Another option would be to always invert the selection (like with the rectangle selection), but I don't think this is very intuitive for the user.

My suggestion is to leave this out for the moment. If desired it can still be introduced in the future.

[TobiHartmann]

Okay, makes sense to me. Thanks for the explanation.

[tobiasholenstein]

Thank you @TobiHartmann and @robcasloz for the reviews!

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 3135914.
Since your change was applied there have been 36 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 78454b6: 8295879: JFR: Remove warnings in the jdk.jfr module
• 33ff80d: 8295402: G1: Tighten assertion in G1ScanHRForRegionClosure::scan_heap_roots
• 303548b: 8294752: G1: Remove redundant checks in check_obj_during_refinement
• cf121df: 8295889: NMT preinit code does not handle allocation errors
• 772be2e: 8295868: 32-bit Windows build failures after JDK-8294466
• e173fd7: 8295885: GHA: Bump gcc versions
• b2878c9: 8295710: remove os::dll_file_extension
• e3a5a34: 8295767: Remove unused fields in sun.awt.geom.Edge
• 324bec1: 8295863: JFR: Use expected size for Maps and Sets
• 3bd3caf: 8294486: Remove vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/ tests ported to serviceability/jvmti.
• ... and 26 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ac6f185eec9efb063bf271516df6529b732a043...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@tobiasholenstein Pushed as commit 3135914.

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