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

8254364: Remove leading _ from struct/union declarations in jvmti.h #596

Closed

Conversation

iklam
Copy link
Member

@iklam iklam commented Oct 11, 2020

This PR changes declarations in jvmti.h like the following from

struct _jvmtiTimerInfo;
typedef struct _jvmtiTimerInfo jvmtiTimerInfo;

to

struct jvmtiTimerInfo;
typedef struct jvmtiTimerInfo jvmtiTimerInfo;

This way, it becomes possible to make forward declaration in C++ code like this, without assuming the knowledge of the struct _jvmtiTimerInfo type:

struct jvmtiTimerInfo;

Please see bug report JDK-8254364 for the before/after versions of jvmti.h, which is generated from XML.

Tested with build tiers 1-5 in Mach5.


Progress

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

Issue

  • JDK-8254364: Remove leading _ from struct/union declarations in jvmti.h

Reviewers

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/596/head:pull/596
$ git checkout pull/596

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

@bridgekeeper bridgekeeper bot commented Oct 11, 2020

👋 Welcome back iklam! 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
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 11, 2020

@iklam The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

  • hotspot
  • serviceability

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added serviceability hotspot labels Oct 11, 2020
@iklam
Copy link
Member Author

@iklam iklam commented Oct 11, 2020

/label remove hotspot

@openjdk openjdk bot removed the hotspot label Oct 11, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 11, 2020

@iklam
The hotspot label was successfully removed.

@iklam iklam marked this pull request as ready for review Oct 11, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr label Oct 11, 2020
@mlbridge
Copy link

@mlbridge mlbridge bot commented Oct 11, 2020

Webrevs

Copy link
Member

@dholmes-ora dholmes-ora left a comment

Hi Ioi,

A little research indicates the problem of using the same name in the typedef and the structs pre-dates even ANSI C, so this change should be fine.
Please wait for approval from serviceability team member before pushing though.
Thanks,
David

@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 12, 2020

@iklam 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:

8254364: Remove leading _ from struct/union declarations in jvmti.h

Reviewed-by: 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 3 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 77c7762: 8254353: Remove unused non-product flags
  • d3069ac: 8254362: x86_32 builds fail after JDK-8253180
  • 25001c5: 8254352: 3 compiler tests failed with "assert(allocates2(pc)) failed: not in CodeBuffer memory"

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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 label Oct 12, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@sspitsyn sspitsyn left a comment

Hi Ioi,

This change looks good to me.

Thanks,
Serguei

@iklam
Copy link
Member Author

@iklam iklam commented Oct 13, 2020

/integrate

@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Oct 13, 2020
@openjdk openjdk bot added integrated and removed ready rfr labels Oct 13, 2020
@openjdk
Copy link

@openjdk openjdk bot commented Oct 13, 2020

@iklam Since your change was applied there have been 27 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • e49232a: 8254599: CDS dump should not warn about hidden classes
  • b464213: 8252407: Build failure with gcc-8+ and asan
  • 2a4328b: 8254610: Problem list test compiler/debug/TestStressCM.java
  • bff586f: 8254269: simplify Node::disconnect_inputs
  • d7128e7: 8254090: Collectors.toUnmodifiableList exposes shared secret
  • df1f132: 8253563: Change sun.security.jca.Providers.threadLists to be ThreadLocal
  • c7f0064: 8253899: Make IsClassUnloadingEnabled signature match specification
  • aad3cf4: 8254234: Add test library stream object builder
  • 4184959: 8252374: Add a new factory method to concatenate a sequence of BodyPublisher instances into a single publisher.
  • 05459df: 8253765: C2: Control randomization in StressLCM and StressGCM
  • ... and 17 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/d43f14161e996523e6c2c725d9eb4f70a253267a...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit c9ca1bb.

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
integrated serviceability
3 participants