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

8311180: Remove unused unneeded definitions from globalDefinitions #14737

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

coleenp
Copy link
Contributor

@coleenp coleenp commented Jun 30, 2023

I noticed this cleanup in a patch that Axel shared with me that I thought should be pushed on its own as trivial.
Tested with tier1 on Oracle supported platforms and looked for these on the others.


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-8311180: Remove unused unneeded definitions from globalDefinitions (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Contributors

  • Axel Boldt-Christmas <aboldtch@openjdk.org>

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14737/head:pull/14737
$ git checkout pull/14737

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14737
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14737/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14737

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14737

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14737.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jun 30, 2023

/contributor add @xmas92

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 30, 2023

👋 Welcome back coleenp! 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 openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 30, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 30, 2023

@coleenp
Contributor Axel Boldt-Christmas <aboldtch@openjdk.org> successfully added.

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jun 30, 2023

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

  • hotspot

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 hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 30, 2023
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Jun 30, 2023

Webrevs

@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ class ICache : public AbstractICache {
static void ppc64_flush_icache_bytes(address start, int bytes) {
// Align start address to an icache line boundary and transform
// nbytes to an icache line count.
const uint line_offset = mask_address_bits(start, line_size - 1);
const uint line_offset = (intptr_t)start & (line_size - 1);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Drive by comment: This used to be a uintptr_t cast, now its intptr_t- why signed? Was that a deliberate decision?

Side question, I always wondered about the widespread use of intptr_t in hotspot when casting pointers to integrals, e.g. in p2i(). Why a signed integer? E.g. if you then use it for bitwise ops (the major reason why one converts a pointer to an int) it seems more hassle to have to remember the rules for using bitwise operators on signed integers.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi Thomas, thanks for noticing. I messed this one up.

Are you arguing for address_word to avoid this confusion? That's a lot of reeducation in the code.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi Coleen, no, I was just wondering if the decision was deliberate. I may have overlooked a reason for this.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tstuefe p2i() is mainly used for printing, and the format uses hex so the signed-ness is immaterial. But in general, yes this seems an odd choice.

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.

Seems okay. Thanks

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 3, 2023

@coleenp 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:

8311180: Remove unused unneeded definitions from globalDefinitions

Co-authored-by: Axel Boldt-Christmas <aboldtch@openjdk.org>
Reviewed-by: dholmes, aboldtch

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 24 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 2c29705: 8309660: C2: failed: XMM register should be 0-15 (UseKNLSetting and ConvF2HF)
  • 52ee570: 8309209: C2 failed "assert(_stack_guard_state == stack_guard_reserved_disabled) failed: inconsistent state"
  • faf1b82: 8310656: RISC-V: __builtin___clear_cache can fail silently.
  • 0e3d91d: 8311215: [BACKOUT] JDK-8047998 Abort the vm if MaxNewSize is not the same as NewSize when MaxHeapSize is the same as InitialHeapSize
  • 09a4924: 8311145: Remove check_with_errno duplicates
  • 8abb9f5: 8047998: Abort the vm if MaxNewSize is not the same as NewSize when MaxHeapSize is the same as InitialHeapSize
  • d2e1159: 8311125: Remove unused parameter 'phase' in AllocateNode::Ideal_allocation
  • 8c8e9d9: 8309819: Clarify API note in Class::getName and MethodType::toMethodDescriptorString
  • 140b70f: 8311186: ProblemList javax/management/remote/mandatory/subjectDelegation/SubjectDelegation1Test.java on linux-aarch64
  • 971c2ef: 8303086: SIGSEGV in JavaThread::is_interp_only_mode()
  • ... and 14 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/a995aa6cd1cd89c2ca6db72b060177eaf7065377...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.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jul 3, 2023
@coleenp
Copy link
Contributor Author

coleenp commented Jul 5, 2023

Thanks for the review David and Axel and finding a bug, Thomas. Maybe p2i should be fixed?
/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 5, 2023

Going to push as commit 22e17c2.
Since your change was applied there have been 43 commits pushed to the master branch:

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jul 5, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Jul 5, 2023
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jul 5, 2023
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Jul 5, 2023

@coleenp Pushed as commit 22e17c2.

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

@coleenp coleenp deleted the global-def-cleanup branch July 5, 2023 13:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
hotspot hotspot-dev@openjdk.org integrated Pull request has been integrated
4 participants