-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.2k
8260630: Templatize literal_size #2310
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
Conversation
|
👋 Welcome back kbarrett! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
|
@kimbarrett |
|
@kimbarrett The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:
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. |
pliden
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me!
|
@kimbarrett 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: 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 3 new commits pushed to the
Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
tschatzl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lgtm.
coleenp
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good!
| // | ||
| // Note: if you create a new subclass of Hashtable<MyNewType, F>, you will need to | ||
| // add a new function static int literal_size(MyNewType lit) | ||
| // because I can't get template <class T> int literal_size(T) to pick the specializations for Symbol and oop. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wrote that. Thanks for fixing this!
| return symbol->size() * HeapWordSize; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| static int literal_size(oop obj) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is literal_size(oop) still needed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's used by literal_size(WeakHandle).
|
/integrate |
|
@kimbarrett Since your change was applied there have been 15 commits pushed to the
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. Pushed as commit 67a34da. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
Please review a couple of small cleanups in Hashtable support.
(1) Replace some "default" overloads for literal_size with a template. This
makes it easier to add new Hashtable value types whose sizes aren't
interesting for statistics printout.
(2) Trivial change to remove no longer used instantiation of Hashtable
support for oop values.
Testing:
mach5 tier1
/issue add 8260629
Progress
Issues
Reviewers
Download
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/2310/head:pull/2310$ git checkout pull/2310