On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 01:14:20 GMT, Rui Li <d...@openjdk.org> wrote: > Backport of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8361497 > > Not clean due to the lack of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8360884. The > cherry pick conflict was caused by the a new test added in the JDK-8360884., > [code](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/4df9c873452293ccde3c7dbcd64e1ced6b6af52e#diff-314e483e41a8dd49577b207c12683b369ab87b6de6da289b9f7e89aae5f412cbR227-R232). > Based on the conversation in > [JDK-8360884](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8360884), it seems people > are not comfortable to backport JDK-8360884 into 25 yet. The conflict was > easy to resolve tho. Just remove the additional test brought by JDK-8360884.
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ScopedValue.java line 597: > 595: Object value = scopedValueBindings().find(this); > 596: boolean found = (value != Snapshot.NIL); > 597: if (found) Cache.put(this, value); Suggestion: if (found) Cache.put(this, value); test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/ScopedValues.java line 240: > 238: // Test 6: Performance with a large number of bindings > 239: static final long deepCall(ScopedValue<Integer> outer, long n) { > 240: long result = 0; This could be defined below, only if `n <= 0` test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/ScopedValues.java line 245: > 243: return where(sv, n).call(() -> deepCall(outer, n - 1)); > 244: } else { > 245: for (int i = 0; i < 1_000_000; i++) { nit: you can reduce indentation by one level, the `else` clause is not needed ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306869898 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306867517 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306865824