On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:10:38 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> make/modules/jdk.hotspot.agent/Lib.gmk line 31:
>>
>>> 29:
>>> 30: ifeq ($(call isTargetOs, linux), true)
>>> 31: SA_CFLAGS := -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
>>
>> We have two choices to feel a bit more comfortable:
>> 1) We unconditional
On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 07:41:02 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request increme
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 08:05:14 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
>>> I hope finally the AIX part of this PR is done.
>>
>> Thanks for the AIX related effort ; I put it again into our internal
>> build/test queue.
>
>>
>> Thanks for the AIX related effort ; I put it again into our internal
>> build/te
> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
> native libraries.
Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one
additional commit since the last revision:
Once
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 10:05:52 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
> those
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 12:37:23 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
>> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
>> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
>> th
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:49:59 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> I wrote earlier:
>>
>>> There is one change that merit highlighting: In
>>> src/java.base/unix/native/libnio/fs/UnixNativeDispatcher.c, I kept the
>>> dlsym lookup for openat64, fstatat64 and fdopendir64, on non-BSD OSes (i.e.
>>>
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 21:31:36 GMT, Vladimir Yaroslavskiy wrote:
>> Hi Vladimir (@iaroslavski),
>>
>> Please see the data below. All tests were run after putting the DPQS code in
>> java.util package and recompiling the JDK for each case.
>>
>> > xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 18:38:29 GMT, Jatin Bhateja wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This patch optimizes sub-word gather operation for x86 targets with AVX2 and
>> AVX512 features.
>>
>> Following is the summary of changes:-
>>
>> 1) Intrinsify sub-word gather using hybrid algorithm which initially
>> pa
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 17:38:13 GMT, Joshua Cao wrote:
>> This change mirrors what we did for ConcurrentHashMap in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/17116. When we add all entries from one
>> map to anther, we should resize that map to the size of the sum of both maps.
>>
>> I used the comman
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 19:06:21 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> Security changes look fine. Although I don't know how to remove those
> annotations later. A lot of compatibility impact.
In case you didn't see it, the warning message are listed in an attachment on
[JDK-8325263](https://bugs.openjdk.org/b
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 09:13:33 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> Looks fine.
Thanks!
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk22/pull/109#issuecomment-1932769043
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 23:36:41 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> After the "this-escape" lint warning was added to javac (JDK-8015831), the
> base module was not updated to be able to compile with this warning enabled.
> This PR makes the necessary changes to allow the base module to build with
> the warni
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 19:28:11 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> After the "this-escape" lint warning was added to javac (JDK-8015831), the
>> base module was not updated to be able to compile with this warning enabled.
>> This PR makes the necessary changes to allow the base module to build with
>> the w
> After the "this-escape" lint warning was added to javac (JDK-8015831), the
> base module was not updated to be able to compile with this warning enabled.
> This PR makes the necessary changes to allow the base module to build with
> the warning enabled.
Joe Darcy has updated the pull request
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:50:10 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [1ae85138](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1ae851387f881263ccc6aeace5afdd0f49d41d33)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
>
> The commit being backported w
> After the "this-escape" lint warning was added to javac (JDK-8015831), the
> base module was not updated to be able to compile with this warning enabled.
> This PR makes the necessary changes to allow the base module to build with
> the warning enabled.
Joe Darcy has updated the pull request
On Fri, 2 Feb 2024 23:36:41 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> After the "this-escape" lint warning was added to javac (JDK-8015831), the
> base module was not updated to be able to compile with this warning enabled.
> This PR makes the necessary changes to allow the base module to build with
> the warni
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:45:40 GMT, Johny Jose wrote:
> Timezone data 2024a changes
Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17743#pullrequestreview-1868554271
> Hi All,
>
> This patch optimizes sub-word gather operation for x86 targets with AVX2 and
> AVX512 features.
>
> Following is the summary of changes:-
>
> 1) Intrinsify sub-word gather using hybrid algorithm which initially
> partially unrolls scalar loop to accumulates values from gather ind
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:45:40 GMT, Johny Jose wrote:
> Timezone data 2024a changes
LGTM
-
Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17743#pullrequestreview-1868470439
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 08:18:14 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Similar to [JDK-8318696](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318696), we
>> should use -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64, and not -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE in the JDK
>> native libraries.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request increme
On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 11:57:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is a follow-up on
> [JDK-8324053](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8324053). I have run the
> bin/blessed-modifier-order.sh on the entire code base, and manually checked
> the result. I have reverted all but these trivial and
On Thu, 1 Feb 2024 11:57:04 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> This is a follow-up on
> [JDK-8324053](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8324053). I have run the
> bin/blessed-modifier-order.sh on the entire code base, and manually checked
> the result. I have reverted all but these trivial and
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 00:48:30 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
>> One idea would be to delegate to a (package-private) method in the formatXXX
>> class.
>> That would localize to the respective class the details.
>> (An abstract protected method might be preferred, but its not worth creating
>> extra publ
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 09:30:01 GMT, Xiaohong Gong wrote:
>> Currently the vector floating-point math APIs like
>> `VectorOperators.SIN/COS/TAN...` are not intrinsified on AArch64 platform,
>> which causes large performance gap on AArch64. Note that those APIs are
>> optimized by C2 compiler on X8
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 12:37:23 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
>> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
>> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
>> th
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 12:37:23 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
>> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
>> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
>> th
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 11:31:05 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Given that subclasses could set these fields lazily (however remote the case
>> might be), do you think we should then not specify the
>> `NullPointerException` for the read methods on these 2 classes. In which
>> case I can exclude these
> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
> those classes?
>
> For these updated classes, I have individ
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 11:14:06 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>>> These 2 classes, the `CheckedInputStream` and the `CheckedOutputStream` are
>>> slightly different from the rest of the classes in this changeset. This
>>> javadoc here is for the constructor of the `CheckedInputStream`. The
>>> implemen
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:47:31 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> These 2 classes, the `CheckedInputStream` and the `CheckedOutputStream` are
>> slightly different from the rest of the classes in this changeset. This
>> javadoc here is for the constructor of the `CheckedInputStream`. The
>> implementati
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:13:00 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> These 2 classes, the `CheckedInputStream` and the `CheckedOutputStream` are
> slightly different from the rest of the classes in this changeset. This
> javadoc here is for the constructor of the `CheckedInputStream`. The
> implementation o
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 09:44:25 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> make usage consistent with other similar usages in the file
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/zip/CheckedOutput
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 09:41:40 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> make usage consistent with other similar usages in the file
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/zip/DeflaterInput
> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
> those classes?
>
> For these updated classes, I have individ
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 01:52:06 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this doc-only change which updates the javadoc
>> of several classes in `java.util.jar` and `java.util.zip` to specify their
>> behaviour when `null` arguments are passed to the constructor or methods of
>> th
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 08:45:40 GMT, Johny Jose wrote:
> Timezone data 2024a changes
LGTM
-
Marked as reviewed by coffeys (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17743#pullrequestreview-1867359537
On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 16:50:10 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [1ae85138](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/1ae851387f881263ccc6aeace5afdd0f49d41d33)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
>
> The commit being backported w
Timezone data 2024a changes
-
Commit messages:
- 8325150: (tz) Update Timezone Data to 2024a
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17743/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=17743&range=00
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325150
Stats: 195 lines
40 matches
Mail list logo
