On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermitt
On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 14:20:13 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Shaojin Wen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update full name
>
> FWIW I'll not review or sponsor any PRs that use `ByteArrayLittleEndian` for
> trivial `byte[]` w
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 23:21:57 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> j.u.Formatter now prints "%tF" (iso standard date) and the result is
>> incorrect when processing year < 0 or year >
>
> Shaojin Wen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
>
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 16:44:03 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
> Arrays.sort() methods.
> The proposed changes are:
>
> 1) Restriction of the AVX512 so
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:58:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 04:41:37 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
> My tier1-3,xcomp testing for v04 passed. I am integrating these changes. Lets
> continue discussion about changes for AMD in
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8317976.
Thank you, Vladimir!
-
PR Comment: https://git.op
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:58:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 02:24:20 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> More explicitly I was thinking something like below.
>>
>> I do wonder if some of the benchmark tests should cover the exceptional
>> cases. I have seen many systems where attempting to try and parse
>> potentially invalid inputs can hit
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:22:18 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> parseInt & parseLong are accelerated by this code, the key code is here
>>
>> class DecimalDigits {
>> public static int digit(byte ch) {
>> return DIGITS_LATIN1[ch & 0xFF]; // If remove & 0xFF it won't get
>> faster
>> }
>>
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 02:54:05 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
> methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
> where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
> LATIN1, f
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 10:03:52 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Integer.java line 682:
>>
>>> 680: */
>>> 681: public static int parseInt(String s) throws NumberFormatException {
>>> 682: if (s != null && s.coder() == String.LATIN1) {
>>
>> Does th
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 08:07:37 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
>> methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
>> where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
>> LATIN1
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 02:54:05 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
> methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
> where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
> LATIN1, f
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 00:14:45 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Code style should be consistent
>
> He means to pull the `radix< Character,MIN_RADIX` and `radix >
> Character.MAX_RADIX` shared code in Integer and Long.parseInt (with radix
> version) to a helper method.
More explicitly I was thinking so
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 00:39:27 GMT, David Schlosnagle wrote:
>> He means to pull the `radix< Character,MIN_RADIX` and `radix >
>> Character.MAX_RADIX` shared code in Integer and Long.parseInt (with radix
>> version) to a helper method.
>
> More explicitly I was thinking something like below.
>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:58:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 00:06:30 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Integer.java line 560:
>>
>>> 558: if (radix > Character.MAX_RADIX) {
>>> 559: throw NumberFormatException.forMaxRadix(radix);
>>> 560: }
>>
>> It sounds like these methods
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:30:26 GMT, David Schlosnagle wrote:
>> By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
>> methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
>> where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
>>
By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
LATIN1, fast-path can improves the performance 10% of
parseInt(String)/
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 02:54:05 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
> By extracting the code that creates the exception, the CodeSize of these
> methods is less than the default FreqInlineSize 325. and for the scenario
> where the most commonly used radix is not specified and the String coder is
> LATIN1, f
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 23:40:55 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
> > It makes sense to let `-XX:ControlIntrinsic=` overrule
> > `VM_Version::is_intel()` check and enable the intrinsics when `AVX512DQ` is
> > supported.
>
> May be it could be done as part of
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 23:38:05 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> Also, for on-heap case the fallback implementation is equivalent to
>> intrinsified case only when offset points at the 0th element of the array.
>
> @iwanowww Yes, you are late to the party :). The fallback implementation
> could
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 23:14:26 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
> Proposed patch has one disadvantage: there's no way to override ergonomics
> decisions on AMD CPUs and forcibly enable the intrinsic without rebuilding
> the JVM.
>
> For many other intrinsics there are flags which enable finer grained
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 23:25:30 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/DualPivotQuicksort.java line 157:
>>
>>> 155: @ForceInline
>>> 156: private static void sort(Class elemType, A array, long
>>> offset, int low, int high, SortOperation so) {
>>> 157:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 23:25:22 GMT, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request with a new target base
>> due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 45 commits:
>>
>> - fix code style and formatting
>> - Merge branch 'master' of https://git.openjd
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 23:36:48 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa wrote:
>> The goal is to develop faster sort routines for x86_64 CPUs by taking
>> advantage of AVX512 instructions. This enhancement provides an order of
>> magnitude speedup for Arrays.sort() using int, long, float and double arrays.
>>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:58:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 22:25:14 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Hi Erik (@erikj79),
>> BUILD_LIBFALLBACKLINKER is from different PR (#13079). If I understand
>> correctly, for LIB_SIMD_SORT, are you suggesting that we don't pad the lines
>> with spaces to align features into columns and instead just
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 21:04:25 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> make/modules/java.base/Lib.gmk line 230:
>>
>>> 228: CFLAGS := $(CFLAGS_JDKLIB) $(LIBFFI_CFLAGS), \
>>> 229: LDFLAGS := $(LDFLAGS_JDKLIB) \
>>> 230: $(call SET_SHARED_LIBRARY_ORIGIN), \
>>
>> If you
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:50:20 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
> I'm not really qualified to review the floating point code. Simplifying away
> offset and getting rid of the StringBuilderHelper all seem like good
> improvements, though I think it'd be good if we could either avoid or split
> out the
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 22:10:45 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/math/BigDecimal.java line 4168:
>>
>>> 4166: int lowInt = (int)intCompact % 100;
>>> 4167: int highInt = (int)intCompact / 100;
>>> 4168: int highIntSize = JLA.stringSize(
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:58:23 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:48:58 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> Shaojin Wen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> refactor based on @liach 's review
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/math/BigDecimal.java line 4168:
>
>> 4166:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 21:15:42 GMT, Justin Lu wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/text/Format/NumberFormat/CurrencyFormat.java line 62:
>>
>>> 60: // currencySymbolsTest() is only ran for COMPAT
>>> 61: private static final boolean isCompat =
>>> 62:
>>> "COMPAT".equals(System.getProperty
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 21:20:47 GMT, Justin Lu wrote:
>> Please review this PR which refactors a number of tests under
>> `test/text/NumberFormat` to use JUnit.
>>
>> During the switch to JUnit, the tests had the following updates (to improve
>> readability)
>> - separate the test data generation
> I submitted PR #1 before, and there were too many changes. I split it
> into multiple PRs with small changes. This one is one of them.
>
> this PR removed the duplicate code for getChars in
> BigDecimal#StringBuilderHelper, i also make performance faster.
> Please review and don't hesitate
> I submitted PR #1 before, and there were too many changes. I split it
> into multiple PRs with small changes. This one is one of them.
>
> this PR removed the duplicate code for getChars in
> BigDecimal#StringBuilderHelper, i also make performance faster.
> Please review and don't hesitate
> Please review this PR which refactors a number of tests under
> `test/text/NumberFormat` to use JUnit.
>
> During the switch to JUnit, the tests had the following updates (to improve
> readability)
> - separate the test data generation from the actual execution of the test
> - create distinct
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 20:13:39 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
>> Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Reflect review comments
>
> test/jdk/java/text/Format/NumberFormat/BigDecimalCompatibilityTest.java line
> 162:
>
>> 160:
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 18:31:44 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
>> are not used.
>> I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all cases and see
>> effect @forceinline without intrinsics.
>> That will tell u
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:48:06 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add @ForceInline annotation to insertion and mixedInsertion sort
>
> make/modules/java.base/Lib.gmk line 230:
> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
> Arrays.sort() methods.
> The proposed changes are:
>
> 1) Restriction of the AVX512 sort acceleration to only Intel CPUs. A
> performance regression (d
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:31:05 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> Hi @vamsi-parasa,
>>
>> Both methods mixedInsertionSort and insertionSort are covered by intrinsics.
>> But insertionSort is run on leftmnost (one) part only and on small ( <
>> MAX_INSERTION_SORT_SIZE = 44) arrays.
>> Do we act
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 20:10:12 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> > > > > Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new
> > > > > intrinsics are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH
> > > > > benchmark to cover all cases and see effect @forceinline without
> > > > > intrinsics.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:10:57 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> To have clear picture could you please run benchmarking to compare both
> cases: current implementation and implementation with Java insertionSort only?
>
> see changes `sort(int.class, a, Unsafe.ARRAY_INT_BASE_OFFSET, low, high,
> DualPiv
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 19:56:47 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> > > > Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new
> > > > intrinsics are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark
> > > > to cover all cases and see effect @forceinline without intrinsics. That
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:59:24 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to add @sealedGraph to `IllegalFormatException`
Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16140#pullrequestreview-1672411158
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 19:06:24 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> @vnkozlov Please advice if we can integrate this PR or if you would like to
>> run some tests first.
>
> Okay. I will start testing for current changes. @sviswa7 please file RFE for
> Zen 4. If we get patch for it we do followup change
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:59:24 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to add @sealedGraph to `IllegalFormatException`
Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16140#pullrequestreview-1672385095
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 14:42:33 GMT, Mahendra Chhipa wrote:
>> Test is updated to create the binary files during test execution.
>
> Mahendra Chhipa has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
> brought in b
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:22:56 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
> > Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
> > are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all
> > cases and see effect @forceinline without intrinsics. That will tell us
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 18:31:44 GMT, Sandhya Viswanathan
wrote:
>> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
>> are not used.
>> I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all cases and see
>> effect @forceinline without intrinsics.
>> That will tell u
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 18:40:30 GMT, R1chterScale wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX512 sort a
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 22:29:55 GMT, Vladimir Kozlov wrote:
>> Srinivas Vamsi Parasa has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> fix whitespace in build script
>
> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsi
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:25:15 GMT, Andrew Haley wrote:
> > Forgive me, I might be missing something very obvious, but is there any
> > particular reason to entirely disable the SIMD accelerated sort on Zen 4
> > rather than having an alternate code path for Zen 4 where it has the
> > `compresss
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 15:45:29 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> Change test to use `RandomFactory` instead of `new Random()` and convert it
>> to JUnit 5.
>
> Brian Burkhalter has updated the pull request incrementally with one
> additional commit since the last revision:
>
> 8313621: assertTru
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 17:28:12 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 06:59:47 GMT, iaroslavski wrote:
> Also @forceinline in these changes only works for case when new intrinsics
> are not used. I would suggest to adapt/update JMH benchmark to cover all
> cases and see effect @forceinline without intrinsics. That will tell us which
> @forcei
> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
> Arrays.sort() methods.
> The proposed changes are:
>
> 1) Restriction of the AVX512 sort acceleration to only Intel CPUs. A
> performance regression (d
Hi Markus,
I see. I didn't know there was a feature which automatically sends
emails about submitted enhancements. It's the first time I see such an
email.
You changed the component from client-libs to core-libs in JDK-8309726,
which is correct, but the email had already been sent.
--
Rega
On Mon, 18 Sep 2023 21:12:44 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Wording changes to make clear that the scenarios described are merely
> examples and are not normative requirements.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 3f6d0168
Author:Stuart Marks
URL:
https://git.openjdk.o
On Fri, 8 Sep 2023 16:13:16 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> This PR proposes to slightly improve some iterators of `AbstractMap`:
>>
>> * Declare two fields `final`
>> * Use distinct classes rather than anonymous classes
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 08:07:31 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to Add @sealedGraph to `StringTemplate.Processor.Linkage`
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 2d46b297
Author:Per Minborg
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/2d46b29728b4dd371c6607245e5ed5e
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 14:07:00 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> The callers in ProcessHandlerImpl depend on knowing the parent pid for each
>> process.
>> They are used to find the descendants of a process. When reading /proc
>> that's necessary.
>
> @RogerRiggs Roger you are most familiar with os_ge
Aleksei,
thank you for reposting to the "right" mailing list, and everybody thank you
for contribution to this discussion, but please note that it was *not me* who
posted to the "wrong" list: In fact, I just opened this issue
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8309726, and it was *the OpenJ
> Change test to use `RandomFactory` instead of `new Random()` and convert it
> to JUnit 5.
Brian Burkhalter has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
8313621: assertTrue -> assertEquals
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 15:22:59 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
>> test/jdk/jdk/internal/math/FloatingDecimal/TestFloatingDecimal.java line 115:
>>
>>> 113: }
>>> 114:
>>> 115: assertTrue(failures == 0);
>>
>> Suggestion:
>>
>> assertEquals(0, failures);
>>
>> Gives a bette
> This is the first draft of a patch for Primitive types in patterns,
> instanceof, and switch (Preview).
>
> Draft spec here:
> https://cr.openjdk.org/~abimpoudis/instanceof/jep443-20231010/specs/instanceof-jls.html
Aggelos Biboudis has updated the pull request incrementally with one additiona
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:25:39 GMT, Raffaello Giulietti
wrote:
>> Change test to use `RandomFactory` instead of `new Random()` and convert it
>> to JUnit 5.
>
> test/jdk/jdk/internal/math/FloatingDecimal/TestFloatingDecimal.java line 115:
>
>> 113: }
>> 114:
>> 115: assertTrue(f
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:25:14 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> The static for the current architecture should be final to allow some
> optimizations.
Marked as reviewed by bpb (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16150#pullrequestreview-1671532716
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:52:54 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to Add @sealedGraph to `Thread.Builder`.
I don't think it's helpful here.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16138#issuecomment-1757905176
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:52:54 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to Add @sealedGraph to `Thread.Builder`.
@pron Do you have any comment on this one? I remember we decided not to do this
in JDK 21.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16138#issuecomment-1757891820
> This PR finalizes the feature of unnamed variables and patterns.
Aggelos Biboudis has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains five additional
com
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:52:54 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Probably keep the function without split into 2 functions, but just adjust
>> the comment a bit as Thomas suggested ?
>
> The callers in ProcessHandlerImpl depend on knowing the parent pid for each
> process.
> They are used to find the
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 08:07:31 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> This PR proposes to Add @sealedGraph to `StringTemplate.Processor.Linkage`
Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16141#pullrequestreview-1671316636
> This PR refactors the SSLSocketParametersTest by removing
> redundant/unnecessary classes and cleans up the logic around expected
> exceptions.
Matthew Donovan has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 12:20:00 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>> Hi Thomas, this function is just the same as the linux and macos
>> implementation. And I do not want to make more changes as really needed,
>> otherwise the siblings character gets lost. Following your proposal means to
>> do the sp
The static for the current architecture should be final to allow some
optimizations.
-
Commit messages:
- 8317956: Make jdk.internal.util.Archecture current architecture final
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16150/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:25:14 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> The static for the current architecture should be final to allow some
> optimizations.
Marked as reviewed by redestad (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16150#pullrequestreview-1671269560
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 13:25:14 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> The static for the current architecture should be final to allow some
> optimizations.
Marked as reviewed by pminborg (Committer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16150#pullrequestreview-1671239088
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermitt
> Addresses Jdk 8288899 : java/util/concurrent/ExecutorService/CloseTest.java
> failed with "InterruptedException: sleep interrupted" and related issues.
>
> This is a major ForkJoin update (and hard to review -- sorry) that finally
> addresses incompatibilities between ExecutorService and ForkJ
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 12:06:54 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> src/java.base/aix/native/libjava/ProcessHandleImpl_aix.c line 43:
>>
>>> 41: /*
>>> 42: * Returns the children of the requested pid and optionally each parent
>>> and
>>> 43: * start time. If requested pid is zero return all processes.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 11:22:21 GMT, Thomas Stuefe wrote:
>> Joachim Kern has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> cosmetic changes 2
>
> src/java.base/aix/native/libjava/ProcessHandleImpl_aix.c line 43:
>
>> 41: /*
>> 42: * Return
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 20:21:56 GMT, Srinivas Vamsi Parasa
wrote:
>> The goal of this PR is to address the follow-up comments to the SIMD
>> accelerated sort PR (#14227) which implemented AVX512 intrinsics for
>> Arrays.sort() methods.
>> The proposed changes are:
>>
>> 1) Restriction of the AVX
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermitt
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 10:57:24 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermitt
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 07:57:11 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Update copyright year
>> - Revoke change in DMHD
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/constant/DirectMethodHandleD
> This PR proposes to add @sealedGraph to MethodHandleDesc and descendants.
Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- Update copyright year
- Revoke change in DMHD
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
> in TreeTest.test5.
> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermittent. Using the API
> getprocs64() instead I was able to eli
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 09:36:47 GMT, Joachim Kern wrote:
>> We see rather often failures in java/lang/ProcessHandle/TreeTest.java on AIX
>> in TreeTest.test5.
>> The reason is: Previously the implementation based on the /proc file system
>> lead to double pids in the child list; at least intermitt
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 23:21:42 GMT, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
> Change test to use `RandomFactory` instead of `new Random()` and convert it
> to JUnit 5.
test/jdk/jdk/internal/math/FloatingDecimal/TestFloatingDecimal.java line 115:
> 113: }
> 114:
> 115: assertTrue(failures == 0);
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 19:20:29 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> I submitted PR #1 before, and there were too many changes. I split it
>> into multiple PRs with small changes. This one is one of them.
>>
>> this PR removed the duplicate code for getChars in
>> BigDecimal#StringBuilderHelper, i also
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 18:40:30 GMT, R1chterScale wrote:
> Forgive me, I might be missing something very obvious, but is there any
> particular reason to entirely disable the SIMD accelerated sort on Zen 4
> rather than having an alternate code path for Zen 4 where it has the
> `compressstoreu` i
On Tue, 19 Sep 2023 09:49:53 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Please review this PR to use modern APIs and language features to simplify
>> equals, hashCode, and compareTo for BigInteger. If you have any performance
>> concerns, please raise them.
>>
>> This PR is cherry-picked from a bigger, not-ye
On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 16:35:51 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> This PR adds an internal method to calculate hash code from the provided
> integer array, offset and length into that array, and the initial hash code
> value.
>
> Current options for calculating a hash code for int[] are inflexible. It's
This PR proposes to Add @sealedGraph to `StringTemplate.Processor.Linkage`
-
Commit messages:
- Add @sealedGraph to StringTemplate.Processor.Linkage
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16141/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=16141&range=00
Issue: https:
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
