8264800: cleanup Threads_lock comments in JVM/TI function headers

[dcubed-ojdk]

A trivial fix to cleanup Threads_lock comments in JVM/TI function headers.

Also remove errant text added by the jframeID XSL template code:

// java_thread - unchecked
// depth - pre-checked as non-negative

The first line about jthread is output in error.
Only the second line about depth should be included.

This fix is tested with a Mach5 Tier1 job set.

---

Progress

• Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
• Commit message must refer to an issue
• Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

• JDK-8264800: cleanup Threads_lock comments in JVM/TI function headers

Reviewers

• Coleen Phillimore (@coleenp - Reviewer)
• Robbin Ehn (@robehn - Reviewer)
• David Holmes (@dholmes-ora - Reviewer)
• Serguei Spitsyn (@sspitsyn - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4254/head:pull/4254
$ git checkout pull/4254

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/4254
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/4254/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 4254

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 4254

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4254.diff

[dcubed-ojdk]

/label add hotspot-runtime
/label add serviceability

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back dcubed! 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]

@dcubed-ojdk
The hotspot-runtime label was successfully added.

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk
The serviceability label was successfully added.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (cb4ac4c0)

[coleenp]

Yes, looks trivial and fine.

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk 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:

8264800: cleanup Threads_lock comments in JVM/TI function headers

Reviewed-by: coleenp, rehn, dholmes, sspitsyn

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 39 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 9d8ad2e: 8267990: Revisit some uses of synchronized in the HttpClient API
• 36dc268: 8268036: ProblemList gtest/AsyncLogGtest.java
• 74b70a5: 8036580: CHA: improve default method support
• 20479c3: 8065760: CHA: Improve abstract method support
• 68f3b3a: 8267807: C2: Downcast receiver to target holder during inlining
• 1c7c0e1: 8267937: Wrong indentation in G1 gc+phases log for free cset subphases
• ffd28c4: 8267947: CI: Preserve consistency between has_subklass() and is_subclass_of()
• 229a6e2: 8267095: Miscellaneous cleanups in vm.runtime.defmeth tests
• 6149b9a: 8267914: Remove DeferredObjectToKlass workaround
• 4eb2168: 8267670: Update java.io, java.math, and java.text to use switch expressions
• ... and 29 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/8a31c07598cd5ea1305a9706d80b0251fd3a1e6d...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.

[dcubed-ojdk]

@coleenp - Thanks for the fast review! Do you think I should wait for a
Serviceability team member review or just integrate? I think they still
trust me to change comments... :-)

[dholmes-ora]

Hi Dan,

I think this is okay. It is rather confusing though as I couldn't figure out why some functions have the threadsList-handle as part of the code generated via the XML file, and some have it in the jvmtiEnv part of the code - e.g. compare SetThreadLocalStorage and GetThreadLocalStorage.

Thanks,
David

[dcubed-ojdk]

@robehn, @dholmes-ora and @sspitsyn - Thanks for the reviews!

It is rather confusing though as I couldn't figure out why some functions
have the threadsList-handle as part of the code generated via the XML
file, and some have it in the jvmtiEnv part of the code - e.g. compare
SetThreadLocalStorage and GetThreadLocalStorage.

That would be an historical question for Robert Field. :-)
Definitely not something I want to deal with in this change.

[dcubed-ojdk]

/integrate

[openjdk]

@dcubed-ojdk Since your change was applied there have been 43 commits pushed to the master branch:

• b17b11e: 8267562: G1: Missing BOT in Open Archive regions causes long pauses
• 2b33835: 8265148: StackWatermarkSet being updated during AsyncGetCallTrace
• 64ba2f0: 8265431: Add -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks to clang builds
• d4b4cae: 8268023: Improve diagnostic for HandshakeFailureTest
• 9d8ad2e: 8267990: Revisit some uses of synchronized in the HttpClient API
• 36dc268: 8268036: ProblemList gtest/AsyncLogGtest.java
• 74b70a5: 8036580: CHA: improve default method support
• 20479c3: 8065760: CHA: Improve abstract method support
• 68f3b3a: 8267807: C2: Downcast receiver to target holder during inlining
• 1c7c0e1: 8267937: Wrong indentation in G1 gc+phases log for free cset subphases
• ... and 33 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/8a31c07598cd5ea1305a9706d80b0251fd3a1e6d...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 40e4171.

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