On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 03:17:14 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
>> annotations and `-Xlint:-foo` options.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excl
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 16:23:34 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
> annotations and `-Xlint:-foo` options.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: c799cad1
Author:Archie Cobbs
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:42:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:43:35 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>Hi Amit,
sorry I only now get to reply to this, I have been traveling. What does the
change do? Is it critical? Would it be possible to fix it after I intergrated
the JEP? Because any change that I do now invalidates existing reviews, and
m
On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 16:22:20 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> Roman Kennke has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Update copyright
>> - Avoid assert/endless-loop in JFR code
>
> @egahlin / @mgronlun could you please review the JFR
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 21:04:51 GMT, Roman Kennke wrote:
>> This is the main body of the JEP 450: Compact Object Headers (Experimental).
>>
>> It is also a follow-up to #20640, which now also includes (and supersedes)
>> #20603 and #20605, plus the Tiny Class-Pointers parts that have been
>> prev
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:42:17 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> Eh... I tried to say that I had only reviewed part of this PR. Maybe I should
> have made that clearer by bumping the number of required reviewers as well; I
> usually do that but I forgot it this time.
Argh, sorry... I was just blin
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 03:17:14 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
>> annotations and `-Xlint:-foo` options.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excl
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 03:17:14 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
>> annotations and `-Xlint:-foo` options.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excl
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 03:17:14 GMT, Archie Cobbs wrote:
>> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings`
>> annotations and `-Xlint:-foo` options.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excl
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 23:20:30 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> `test/jdk/tools/jlink/JmodLess` can be renamed to `linkableRuntimeImage` or a
> name consistent with the JEP.
Renamed to `runtimeImage`. As it's in the `jlink` folder already it's implied
that it's the link from run-time image then.
> tes
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:42:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
> Please review this patch which adds a jlink mode to the JDK which doesn't
> need the packaged modules being present. A.k.a run-time image based jlink.
> Fundamentally this patch adds an option to use `jlink` even though your JDK
> install might not come with the packaged modules (directory `jm
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 18:03:16 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> I expect that the jmodless tests will first build an image (say `image1`)
> using jlink `--generate-linkable-runtime` option and then verify
> `image1/bin/jlink` that links from the run-time image. I don't see
> `--generate-linkable-runtime
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 20:41:27 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> This proposed change would move the native objects required for NIO file
>> interaction from the libnio native library to the libjava native library on
>> Linux, macOS, and Windows.
>
> Brian Burkhalter has updated the pull request in
> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
> main changes in the JEP and also includes an apidiff of the specif
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 19:39:08 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this patch which adds a jlink mode to the JDK which doesn't
>> need the packaged modules being present. A.k.a run-time image based jlink.
>> Fundamentally this patch adds an option to use `jlink` even though your JDK
>> i
> This is the main body of the JEP 450: Compact Object Headers (Experimental).
>
> It is also a follow-up to #20640, which now also includes (and supersedes)
> #20603 and #20605, plus the Tiny Class-Pointers parts that have been
> previously missing.
>
> Main changes:
> - Introduction of the (
> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
> main changes in the JEP and also includes an apidiff of the specif
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 18:58:22 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security
>> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The
>> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the
>> main cha
On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 17:01:07 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> Sorry for coming late, but I think bidi/icu is an external library and its
> updates are tracked by i18n engineers. We might have to revert those specific
> changes for library parity dependent on i18n engineers' discretion.
Thank you, Chen.
On Sun, 3 Nov 2024 12:33:05 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Right - this paragraph - lines 1620-1625 (old file) / 1362-1367 (new file)
>> is no longer relevant and should be removed too. Thanks for spotting that.
>
> Removed in jep486 branch in sandbox so will get picked up when PR is
> refreshed.
> Please review this patch which adds a jlink mode to the JDK which doesn't
> need the packaged modules being present. A.k.a run-time image based jlink.
> Fundamentally this patch adds an option to use `jlink` even though your JDK
> install might not come with the packaged modules (directory `jm
On Mon, 4 Nov 2024 20:42:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> This is the implementation of [JEP 479: _Remove the Windows 32-bit x86
>> Port_](https://openjdk.org/jeps/479).
>>
>> This is the summary of JEP 479:
>>> Remove the source code and build support for the Windows 32-bit x86 port.
>>>
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 00:58:10 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> I think you may be throwing the baby out with the bath water when it comes to
> `__stdcall`. It may be that 32-bit requires `__stdcall` but I don't see
> anything that states `__stdcall` is ONLY for 32-bit!
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-u
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 01:44:48 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> I think you may be throwing the baby out with the bath water when it comes to
> `__stdcall`. It may be that 32-bit requires `__stdcall` but I don't see
> anything that states `__stdcall` is ONLY for 32-bit!
To my knowledge the only thing __
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 01:44:48 GMT, Alex Menkov wrote:
> On ARM and x64 processors, __stdcall is accepted and ignored by the compiler;
@alexmenkov and @TheShermanTanker , I stand corrected and my apologies to
@magicus .
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21744#issuecommen
27 matches
Mail list logo
