On 10/27/17 1:47 PM, mandy chung wrote:


On 10/27/17 7:08 AM, coleen.phillim...@oracle.com wrote:


On 10/27/17 9:37 AM, David Holmes wrote:

The one file that is needed is a hotspot file - jvm.h defines the interface that hotspot exports via jvm.cpp.

If you leave jvm.h in hotspot/prims then a very large chunk of your boilerplate changes are not needed. The JDK code doesn't care what the name of the directory is - whatever it is just gets added as a -I directive (the JDK code will include "jvm.h" not "prims/jvm.h" the way hotspot sources do.

This isn't something we want to change back or move again later. Whatever we do now we live with.

I think it belongs with jni.h and I think the core libraries group would agree.   It seems more natural there than buried in the hotspot prims directory.  I guess this is on hold while we have this debate.   Sigh.

Actually with -I directives, changing to jvm.h from prims/jvm.h would still work.   Maybe we should change the name to jvm.hpp since it's jvm.cpp though?   Or maybe just have two divergent copies and close this as WNF.

I also think hotspot/prims is not a good location. src/java.base/share/include is a well-defined location for native header files.  Maybe internal header files could be placed in include/internal but this is a separate issue .  I should create an issue for jvm.h and jmm.h (I looked at the files under the include directory and jvm.h and jmm.h are the only two internal header files in the include directory).

I do think removing the duplicated copy of jvm.h is a good change.  This is finally possible with the consolidated repository and we no longer need to update two copies of jvm.h for any change to the JVM interface.   This change will work with -I directive setting to the new location, if changed later.

What do you think?

I agree.  I'm not really bothered by it being in src/java/base/share/include in the first place though.   Only jni.h and jni_md.h are copied into the images, so this seems a bit pained to make jvm.h be in some other directory.  But your call, really.

Thanks,
Coleen


Mandy

Reply via email to