8373599: Cleanup arguments.hpp includes

[stefank]

In the Valhalla project we are considering using a property in Arguments to figure out if Valhalla is enabled. To minimize transitive-include-proliferation if this property ever needs to be checked in a header I propose that we clean up the header includes in arguments.hpp.

I'm opening the review for this so that I can get opinions on the move of functions. I'm going to compile this on all our platforms and will likely add a few more includes when unrelated files fail to compile because they relied on the includes provided through by java.hpp and arguments.hpp.

---

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-8373599: Cleanup arguments.hpp includes (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

• Coleen Phillimore (@coleenp - Reviewer)
• Kim Barrett (@kimbarrett - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28791/head:pull/28791
$ git checkout pull/28791

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/28791
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/28791/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 28791

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 28791

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28791.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back stefank! 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]

@stefank 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:

8373599: Cleanup arguments.hpp includes

Reviewed-by: coleenp, kbarrett

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 27 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 629bf20: 8371408: [Linux] VM.info output for container information is confusing
• 3559eec: 8373428: Refine variables with the same name in nested scopes in PhaseChaitin::gather_lrg_masks
• ad6611a: 8371347: Move the ObjectMonitorTable to a separate new file
• ... and 24 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d854a04231a437a6af36ae65780961f40f336343...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]

@stefank 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.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 01: Full - Incremental (90f3919c)
• 00: Full (e1d1bf61)

[coleenp]

This looks good, pending all the platforms building. Thanks!

[iklam]

I think this clean up is good by itself.

However, do you plan to include arguments.hpp in a lot of files (including files) just to check if valhalla is enabled?

If that's the case, I think it's better to move the check into its own header, similar to existing files like cdsConfig.hpp and gcConfig.hpp. Maybe valueTypeConfig.hpp?

[coleenp]

Let's see how many files end up with enable_valhalla() first, then decide, after @Arraying work on https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8371357.

[Arraying]

Let's see how many files end up with enable_valhalla() first, then decide, after @Arraying work on https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8371357.

As of right now 37 non-test files have is_valhalla_enabled() and 26 new #include "runtime/arguments.hpp if I scripted correctly. I don't anticipate those numbers changing much until integration.

[stefank]

I think this clean up is good by itself.

However, do you plan to include arguments.hpp in a lot of files (including files) just to check if valhalla is enabled?

If that's the case, I think it's better to move the check into its own header, similar to existing files like cdsConfig.hpp and gcConfig.hpp. Maybe valueTypeConfig.hpp?

That would also be fine by me. Maybe we can bring that question over to the Valhalla PR:
openjdk/valhalla#1759

[dholmes-ora]

Removed comment that needs discussing in the Valhalla PR.

[stefank]

Anyone else wants to put the second reviewer stamp on this?

[kimbarrett]

Looks good.

[stefank]

Thanks for the reviews!
/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit f5187eb.
Since your change was applied there have been 27 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 629bf20: 8371408: [Linux] VM.info output for container information is confusing
• 3559eec: 8373428: Refine variables with the same name in nested scopes in PhaseChaitin::gather_lrg_masks
• ad6611a: 8371347: Move the ObjectMonitorTable to a separate new file
• ... and 24 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/d854a04231a437a6af36ae65780961f40f336343...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@stefank Pushed as commit f5187eb.

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