On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 00:40:04 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Improving option value handling to support passing argument value starts
>> with "--".
>>
>> Before the fix, in following example, --add-modules will be considered as
>> another option for JLink instead of argument value for --add-options.
>
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:25:43 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Clean backport of [JDK-8345259](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259)
> to JDK 24 which has JEP 493.
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22849#pullrequestreview-253
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 15:08:31 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Clean backport of a test follow-up for #22849 targeting JDK 24. Please
> review! Thanks in advance.
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22972#pullrequestreview-2537763599
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:18:48 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Clean backport of [JDK-8345259](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259)
>> to JDK 24 which has JEP 493.
>
> I created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259. Looks like the tests
> need update.
>
On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 16:55:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 06:15:58 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:23:55 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/plugins/SystemModulesPlugin.java
>> line 1216:
>>
>>> 1214: // and is load from the cache array with
>>> 1215: // dedupSetValues[index]
>>> 1216:
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 19:14:04 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 18:13:11 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/plugins/SystemModulesPlugin.java
>> line 1714:
>>
>>> 1712: }
>>> 1713:
>>> 1714: class SetReference> implements
>>> Comparable> {
>>
>> The class name `SetRefere
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:02:38 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> A few jpackage tests invoke `jlink --add-modules ALL-MODULE-PATH` without
> `--module-path` and they now fail because of JDK-8345259 which requires
> `--module-path` to be set when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` is used. The fix is to add
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:02:38 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> A few jpackage tests invoke `jlink --add-modules ALL-MODULE-PATH` without
> `--module-path` and they now fail because of JDK-8345259 which requires
> `--module-path` to be set when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` is used. The fix is to add
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:02:38 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> A few jpackage tests invoke `jlink --add-modules ALL-MODULE-PATH` without
> `--module-path` and they now fail because of JDK-8345259 which requires
> `--module-path` to be set when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` is used. The fix is to add
A few jpackage tests invoke `jlink --add-modules ALL-MODULE-PATH` without
`--module-path` and they now fail because of JDK-8345259 which requires
`--module-path` to be set when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` is used. The fix is to add
`--add-modules $JAVA_HOME/jmods` which was the default before JDK-8345259
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 13:25:43 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Clean backport of [JDK-8345259](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259)
> to JDK 24 which has JEP 493.
I created https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345259. Looks like the tests
need update.
-
PR Comment: https://g
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 21:30:10 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 21:30:10 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:10:16 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 19:11:12 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 19:11:12 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:45:56 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:45:56 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 11:45:56 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 18:33:06 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `AL
On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 18:55:38 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> But this would be for a different bug so as to prevent scope-creep.
>>
>> Filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346299 for this.
>
> jlink --add-modules ALL-MODULE-PATH --limit-modules jdk.jfr --module-path
On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 18:40:19 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>>> A different question would be what should happen if the module specified in
>>> `--limit-modules` is **not** in the dependency graph of ALL-MODULE-PATH
>>> modules.
>>
>> This seems a good candidate for an error as it's unexpected, I
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:13:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> This is a clean backport of JDK-8345573 to the stabilization repo branch of
> JDK 24 GA.
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22738#pullrequestreview-2503411481
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 23:32:14 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/plugins/SystemModulesPlugin.java
>> line 619:
>>
>>> 617: // generate dedup set fields and provider
>>> methods
>>> 618: var dedupSets = ge
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 23:22:04 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> The code has been refactored. The comment should be updated to reflect the
>> new code?
>
> Will do a pass in next commit, I want to see if this refactoring favorable.
Yes it does. Thanks for the update.
-
PR Review Comment:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 23:05:32 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Henry Jen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Move up Snippet setup as a builder
>
> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jd
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 19:30:19 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> This PR split out large array/set construction into separate factory methods
>> to avoid oversized method trying to construct several of those.
>>
>> In order to do that, we will need to generate those help methods on demand
>> in the class
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 02:15:32 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Henry Jen 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 13 additional commits
>> since
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 14:15:11 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 14:11:44 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> We have:
>> - `testLimitModules()` limits on a module from the module path, `m1`. It
>> expects `m1` and it's dependencies in the image.
>> - `testAddModules()` limits on a module dependency, but has modules from the
>> module path add
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 10:39:36 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/JlinkTask.java line 441:
>>
>>> 439: // run-time image. Only do this if no --limit-modules
>>> has been
>>> 440: // specified to begin with.
>>> 441:
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 14:15:11 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 16:15:03 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> > This method, in turn, calls `JLinkBundlerHelper.getDefaultModules()` which
> > uses `Configuration.empty().resolveAndBind()` which performs the service
> > binding.
>
> So it appears using `Configuration.empty().resolve()` instead wo
On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 15:13:02 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> This is a clean backport of JDK-8345573 to the stabilization repo branch of
> JDK 24 GA.
Yes I agree.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22738#issuecomment-2541997686
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:27:23 GMT, Christian Stein wrote:
>>> `release of {0} too high: {1}`
>>
>> I think this is better. Probably good enough.
>>
>> My concern stems from the fact that 'release' doesn't seem to be defined for
>> _class files_. I see that the term 'release' exists, and maps to
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 18:30:54 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:06:58 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 09:57:11 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Personally, I find it less clear to call it `newModuleFinder`. What it does
>> is that it creates a finder based on the passed in finder that "finds" fewer
>> modules. How about `newLimitedFinder()`? But no strong feelings, so if you
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 10:06:23 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for JEP 493 enabled JDKs related to the
>> `--limit-modules` option. The existing jlink `bindservices` tests cover this
>> issue. Previously they didn't run on a JEP 493 enabled JDK, since `jmods`
>> folder is m
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 20:50:15 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for JEP 493 enabled JDKs related to the
>> `--limit-modules` option. The existing jlink `bindservices` tests cover this
>> issue. Previously they didn't run on a JEP 493 enabled JDK, since `jmods`
>> folder is m
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:02:29 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix for JEP 493 enabled JDKs related to the
>> `--limit-modules` option. The existing jlink `bindservices` tests cover this
>> issue. Previously they didn't run on a JEP 493 enabled JDK, since `jmods`
>> folder is m
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 12:06:19 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this extension to #22609 which now disallows `ALL-MODULE-PATH`
>> without explicit `--module-path` option or a non-existent module path. In
>> addition, this fixes a bug mentioned in #22609 when `ALL-MODULE-PATH` and
>>
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 23:33:08 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Severin Gehwolf has updated the pull request incrementally with two
>> additional commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - Handle non-existent module-path with ALL-MODULE-PATH
>> - Move test, more test fi
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 11:16:55 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> Please review this PR which relaxes the interpretation of the system property
> `stackwalk.debug` in `java.lang.StackStreamFactory` to be case insensitive.
>
> Motivation:
> Only 5 of 83 boolean system properties in `java.base` have a ca
On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:57:22 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review these changes to jpackage in light of [JEP
> 493](https://openjdk.org/jeps/493). When this feature is enabled, then some
> of the `jpackage` tests fail. The failures fall into the following categories:
>
> - `ALL-DEFAULT`
On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:57:22 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review these changes to jpackage in light of [JEP
> 493](https://openjdk.org/jeps/493). When this feature is enabled, then some
> of the `jpackage` tests fail. The failures fall into the following categories:
>
> - `ALL-DEFAULT`
> This is a test-only change so it is eligible for backport; in addition, this
> change is logically part of the Class-File API finalized in JDK 24.
>
> The commit being backported was authored by Chen Liang on 6 Dec 2024 and was
> reviewed by Mandy Chung and Adam Sotona.
>
>
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 18:25:22 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this bug fix for using `jlink` when linking from the run-time
> image. For regular JDK builds which include the `jmods` folder, that path is
> automatically added as the `--module-path` when not otherwise specified on
> th
On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 17:38:22 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
>> `XmlReaderContentHandler.endElement()` routes a `Class.forName()` call
>> through `ReflectUtil.forName()`. When
>> `sun.reflect.misc.ReflectUtil.forName()` calls the 1-arg `Class.forName()`,
>> it is doing so from `java.base`, and so u
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for
>> enabling ClassFile API in the tests. The remainder of these flags in all
>> tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features
>> (primitive
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 21:41:28 GMT, Brent Christian wrote:
> `XmlReaderContentHandler.endElement()` routes a `Class.forName()` call
> through `ReflectUtil.forName()`. When
> `sun.reflect.misc.ReflectUtil.forName()` calls the 1-arg `Class.forName()`,
> it is doing so from `java.base`, and so using
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for
>> enabling ClassFile API in the tests. The remainder of these flags in all
>> tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features
>> (primitive
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 03:08:36 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 17:30:17 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> src/jdk.jlink/share/classes/jdk/tools/jlink/internal/TaskHelper.java line
>> 552:
>>
>>> 550: if (potentiallyGnuOption && param.length() >=
>>> 2 &&
>>> 551: param.charAt(0) == '-' && param
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 17:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/jlink/TaskHelperTest.java line 115:
>>
>>> 113: { "--raw-arg-plugin", "--main-no-arg --list",
>>> "--main-no-arg"},
>>> 114: { "--raw-arg-plugin", " --main-no-arg", "--main-no-arg" },
>>> 115: };
On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 17:09:47 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Improving option value handling to support passing argument value starts
>> with "--".
>>
>> Before the fix, in following example, --add-modules will be considered as
>> another option for JLink instead of argument value for --add-options.
>
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 19:00:33 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> In fact, VM no longer sets this property. This should be updated to simply
>> do `props.put`.
>
> It is just for compatibility with other VM implementation. We don't set the
> property in hotspot with this PR.
Is it part of the implementat
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 07:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 07:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 07:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 18:24:26 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> Henry Jen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Clean up adapting review comments
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/VersionProps.jav
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 07:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 07:31:24 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
>> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
>> and java.vendor.url.
>>
>> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
>> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was init
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 18:25:22 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> Please review this bug fix for using `jlink` when linking from the run-time
> image. For regular JDK builds which include the `jmods` folder, that path is
> automatically added as the `--module-path` when not otherwise specified on
> th
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 15:26:32 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> ALL-MODULE-PATH means all observable modules on the module path but here,
> it's all observable modules minus jdk.jlink or any module that directly
> requires jdk.jlink. This is hard to reason about, and not exactly right
> either because
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:42:37 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix to how patched modules are being handled when linking
>> from the run-time image. During review of
>> [JDK-8311302](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8311302) it was pointed
>> out that module patching should b
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>>
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - Remove unused import of Pr
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:44:05 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>>
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - Remove unused import of Pr
On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 21:38:28 GMT, Henry Jen wrote:
> Add jlink plugins to allow branding change for java.vendor, java.vm.vendor
> and java.vendor.url.
>
> The jlink plugin will change the value in java.lang.VersionProps, which will
> set those property values. The `java.vm.vendor` was initializ
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 19:45:15 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> When core reflection was migrated to be implemented by Method Handles,
>> somehow, the method handles are not used for native methods, which are
>> generally linkable by method handles. This causes significant performance
>> regressions wh
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:05:58 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
> The long-term plan would be to not need this at all. If we were to use the
> jrt FS throughout in JRTArchive I think module patches won't matter and
> wouldn't populate to the resulting image and this could get removed. But that
> woul
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 01:04:06 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> When core reflection was migrated to be implemented by Method Handles,
>> somehow, the method handles are not used for native methods, which are
>> generally linkable by method handles. This causes significant performance
>> regressions w
On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:01:01 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this fix to how patched modules are being handled when linking
>> from the run-time image. During review of
>> [JDK-8311302](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8311302) it was pointed
>> out that module patching should
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 22:38:14 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> The `java.lang.Sytem.security` field no longer exists; remove it from the
>> filterMap.
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Update copyright
Marked as rev
On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 20:55:03 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> The `java.lang.Sytem.security` field no longer exists; remove it from the
> filterMap.
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22400#pullrequestreview-2462735401
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 22:17:10 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> When core reflection was migrated to be implemented by Method Handles,
> somehow, the method handles are not used for native methods, which are
> generally linkable by method handles. This causes significant performance
> regressions when
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 22:17:10 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
> When core reflection was migrated to be implemented by Method Handles,
> somehow, the method handles are not used for native methods, which are
> generally linkable by method handles. This causes significant performance
> regressions when
On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:04:38 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this simple patch which adds a new external system property
>> `jdk.patched` when the runtime has been patched with the `--patch-module`
>> switch. This is useful for two reasons: 1) it allows one to determine at
>> run-
On Fri, 22 Nov 2024 17:04:38 GMT, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
>> Please review this simple patch which adds a new external system property
>> `jdk.patched` when the runtime has been patched with the `--patch-module`
>> switch. This is useful for two reasons: 1) it allows one to determine at
>> run-
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:39:39 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> SM removal for internal implementation classes:
>> java.lang.CharacterName
>> java.lang.ref.Finalizer
>> jdk.internal.icu.impl.ICUBinary
>> jdk.internal.misc.ExtendedMapMode
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incre
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 17:07:55 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
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 11:24:23 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
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 11:24:23 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
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 14:28:30 GMT, Patricio Chilano Mateo
wrote:
> This is the implementation of JEP 491: Synchronize Virtual Threads without
> Pinning. See [JEP 491](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8337395) for
> further details.
>
> In order to make the code review easier the changes hav
updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Move hash cache out of shared states section
>
> Co-authored-by: Mandy Chung
Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20179#pullrequestreview-2412041512
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 00:32:49 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> In the patch for [JDK-8338544](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338544)
>> #20665, the validation methods `validateBinaryClassName` and
>> `validateInternalClassName` only checks if a separator char is the initial
>> or final char, or i
On Sat, 2 Nov 2024 00:16:41 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> In the patch for [JDK-8338544](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338544)
>> #20665, the validation methods `validateBinaryClassName` and
>> `validateInternalClassName` only checks if a separator char is the initial
>> or final char, or i
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 23:57:20 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/constant/ConstantUtils.java line
>> 258:
>>
>>> 256: if (name.isEmpty())
>>> 257: return name;
>>> 258: return validateBinaryClassName(name);
>>
>> Perhaps have a utility
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 19:24:05 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> In the patch for [JDK-8338544](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338544)
>> #20665, the validation methods `validateBinaryClassName` and
>> `validateInternalClassName` only checks if a separator char is the initial
>> or final char, or i
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 01:26:44 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
> `--
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 22:25:04 GMT, Mandy Chung wrote:
> Many tests failed in compiling test library
> `test/jdk/tools/lib/tests/JImageValidator.java` as it depends on the
> ClassFile API and preview needs to be enabled.
It looks like my environment issue. They all pass f
1 - 100 of 946 matches
Mail list logo
