8321314: Reinstate disabling the compiler's default active annotation processing

[jddarcy]

---

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-8321319 to be approved

Issues

• JDK-8321314: Reinstate disabling the compiler's default active annotation processing (Enhancement - P3)
• JDK-8321319: Reinstate disabling the compiler's default active annotation processing (CSR)

Reviewers

• Vicente Romero (@vicente-romero-oracle - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19331/head:pull/19331
$ git checkout pull/19331

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/19331
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19331/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 19331

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 19331

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19331.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back darcy! 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]

@jddarcy 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:

8321314: Reinstate disabling the compiler's default active annotation processing

Reviewed-by: vromero

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 83 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 985b9ce: 8330694: Rename 'HeapRegion' to 'G1HeapRegion'
• 05f13e7: 8329667: [macos] Issue with JTree related fix for JDK-8317771
• 7bf1989: 8320575: generic type information lost on mandated parameters of record's compact constructors
• 253508b: 8332303: Better JMX interoperability with older JDKs, after removing Subject Delegation
• ebc520e: 8332841: GenShen: Pull shared members from control thread into common base class
• 236432d: 8332084: Ensure JdkConsoleImpl.restoreEcho visibility in a shutdown hook
• b3b3366: 8332631: Update nsk.share.jpda.BindServer to don't use finalization
• f66a586: 8332641: Update nsk.share.jpda.Jdb to don't use finalization
• cd3e4c0: 8326734: text-decoration applied to lost when mixed with or
• c2cca2a: 8330647: Two CDS tests fail with -UseCompressedOops and UseSerialGC/UseParallelGC
• ... and 73 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d6b7f9b170b6ce4f7275cc7595b71b9a3e93c133...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]

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

• 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.

[jddarcy]

See broader policy discussion in

https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-May/009028.html

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (e74c59e0)

[SentryMan]

Since JDK-8306819, support for '-proc:full' has been backported to earlier update release trains. This should ease the impact of the behavioral change.

I'm not sure I follow. Since the warning saying "implicit annotation processing will be disabled" was not also backported, how would people on earlier Java versions even know to use this new parameter?

As it stands, the behavior change will still break a large number of builds that rely on implicit annotation processing, so I don't understand how the impact was reduced. Perhaps I'm looking at it from the wrong angle?

[jddarcy]

Since JDK-8306819, support for '-proc:full' has been backported to earlier update release trains. This should ease the impact of the behavioral change.

I'm not sure I follow. Since the warning saying "implicit annotation processing will be disabled" was not also backported, how would people on earlier Java versions even know to use this new parameter?

As it stands, the behavior change will still break a large number of builds that rely on implicit annotation processing, so I don't understand how the impact was reduced. Perhaps I'm looking at it from the wrong angle?

With -proc:full backed to 17u and 11u (already in JDK 21) ,together with current version of the Maven compiler plugin supporting -proc:full, the ability to specific -proc:full in a build is decoupled from upgrading to JDK 21 or later.

In other words, developers today[*] can change their build configurations to work seamlessly with a future upgrade to JDK 23, or later, with the different annotation processing default.

Of course, if a build is not using annotation processing, it will work fine after the change too. Various other explicit build configurations to support annotation processing, such as setting the processor path, are possible as well.

[*] Using the current Maven compiler plugin and current version of a JDK update release.

[vicente-romero-oracle]

lgtm

[jddarcy]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 79f4998.
Since your change was applied there have been 158 commits pushed to the master branch:

• ec88c6a: 8332917: failure_handler should execute gdb "info threads" command on linux
• b3e29db: 8333108: Update vmTestbase/nsk/share/DebugeeProcess.java to don't use finalization
• 11e926c: 8332777: Update JCStress test suite
• 44c1845: 8330852: All callers of JvmtiEnvBase::get_threadOop_and_JavaThread should pass current thread explicitly
• 922e312: 8328611: Thread safety issue in com.sun.tools.jdi.ReferenceTypeImpl::classObject
• 1d889e5: 8332487: Regression in Crypto-AESGCMBench.encrypt (and others) after JDK-8328181
• 32636dc: 8333105: Shenandoah: Results of concurrent mark may be lost for degenerated cycle
• 7071542: 8331189: Implementation of Scoped Values (Third Preview)
• 4acafb8: 8333107: javac fails with an exception when processing broken lambda
• 921860d: 8333264: Remove unused resolve_sub_helper declaration after JDK-8322630
• ... and 148 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d6b7f9b170b6ce4f7275cc7595b71b9a3e93c133...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@jddarcy Pushed as commit 79f4998.

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