Skip to content

Conversation

@GoeLin
Copy link
Member

@GoeLin GoeLin commented Mar 31, 2025

I backport this for parity with 21.0.8-oracle

Trivial resolve, probably clean anyways.


Progress

  • JDK-8339148 needs maintainer approval
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8339148: Make os::Linux::active_processor_count() public (Enhancement - P3 - Approved)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev.git pull/1553/head:pull/1553
$ git checkout pull/1553

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/1553
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev.git pull/1553/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 1553

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 1553

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk21u-dev/pull/1553.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

@bridgekeeper
Copy link

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 31, 2025

👋 Welcome back goetz! 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 bot commented Mar 31, 2025

@GoeLin 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:

8339148: Make os::Linux::active_processor_count() public

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 2 new commits pushed to the master branch:

  • b3118d8: 8343019: Primitive caches must use boxed instances from the archive
  • 70bd6f3: 8333805: Replaying compilation with null static final fields results in a crash

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 changed the title Backport 12d060a255b9b783488714c6c2cb73a899d3f708 8339148: Make os::Linux::active_processor_count() public Mar 31, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Mar 31, 2025

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

@openjdk openjdk bot added backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required labels Mar 31, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Mar 31, 2025

⚠️ @GoeLin This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Mar 31, 2025
@mlbridge
Copy link

mlbridge bot commented Mar 31, 2025

Webrevs

@openjdk openjdk bot removed the clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required label Mar 31, 2025
@GoeLin GoeLin force-pushed the goetz_backport_8339148 branch from a7a0594 to bdc072e Compare March 31, 2025 14:41
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Mar 31, 2025

@GoeLin Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it invalidates existing review comments. Note for future reference, the bots always squash all changes into a single commit automatically as part of the integration. See OpenJDK Developers’ Guide for more information.

@openjdk openjdk bot added clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed approval Requires approval; will be removed when approval is received labels Mar 31, 2025
@GoeLin
Copy link
Member Author

GoeLin commented Apr 2, 2025

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 2, 2025

Going to push as commit bc269de.
Since your change was applied there have been 4 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • 0f6ee76: 8328484: Convert and Opensource few JFileChooser applet test to main
  • 373753f: 8315951: Open source several Swing HTMLEditorKit related tests
  • b3118d8: 8343019: Primitive caches must use boxed instances from the archive
  • 70bd6f3: 8333805: Replaying compilation with null static final fields results in a crash

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Apr 2, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Apr 2, 2025
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Apr 2, 2025
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Apr 2, 2025

@GoeLin Pushed as commit bc269de.

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

@GoeLin GoeLin deleted the goetz_backport_8339148 branch April 2, 2025 09:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

backport Port of a pull request already in a different code base clean Identical backport; no merge resolution required integrated Pull request has been integrated

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant