Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

8309196: Remove Thread.countStackFrames #14257

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

AlanBateman
Copy link
Contributor

@AlanBateman AlanBateman commented Jun 1, 2023

Thread.countStackFrames is/was an ill-defined method that dates from JDK 1.0 for counting the stack frames of a suspended Thread. The method was deprecated in JDK 1.2 (1998), deprecated for removal in Java 9, and re-specified/degraded to throw UOE unconditionally in Java 14. Java 22 would be a fine time to finally remove this method.

Code that wants to count stack frames should be directed to use j.l.StackWalker, or if a tool, then it can use JVM TI and other tool APIs.

A corpus analysis of 30M classes in 131k artifacts from Maven Central found only 1 usages to this method. The 1 usage appears to be a class that just wraps all methods, it doesn't actually make use of it.


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
  • Change requires CSR request JDK-8309201 to be approved

Issues

  • JDK-8309196: Remove Thread.countStackFrames (Enhancement - P4)
  • JDK-8309201: Remove Thread.countStackFrames (CSR)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14257/head:pull/14257
$ git checkout pull/14257

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14257
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14257/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14257

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14257

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14257.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 1, 2023

👋 Welcome back alanb! 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
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 1, 2023

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

  • core-libs

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.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 1, 2023
@AlanBateman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/csr

@openjdk openjdk bot added the csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration label Jun 1, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 1, 2023

@AlanBateman has indicated that a compatibility and specification (CSR) request is needed for this pull request.

@AlanBateman please create a CSR request for issue JDK-8309196 with the correct fix version. This pull request cannot be integrated until the CSR request is approved.

@AlanBateman AlanBateman marked this pull request as ready for review June 1, 2023 12:25
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 1, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jun 1, 2023

Webrevs

Copy link
Contributor

@RogerRiggs RogerRiggs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good.

Copy link
Member

@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes :)

Copy link
Member

@irisclark irisclark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Happy to see this being removed early in JDK 22!

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 8, 2023

@AlanBateman 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:

8309196: Remove Thread.countStackFrames

Reviewed-by: rriggs, mchung, dholmes, jpai, iris

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 no new commits pushed to the master branch. If another commit should be pushed before you perform the /integrate command, your PR will be automatically rebased. If you prefer to avoid any potential 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.

@openjdk openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration labels Jun 8, 2023
@AlanBateman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 8, 2023

Going to push as commit b2a5271.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 8, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jun 8, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 8, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 8, 2023

@AlanBateman Pushed as commit b2a5271.

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants