On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 03:11:35 GMT, Yumin Qi <mi...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Hi, Please review >> systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split it >> into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code into >> CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info (DumpTime/RunTime) to >> sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy related to >> lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and >> light. >> >> Tests: tier1,tier3,tier4 >> >> Thanks >> Yumin > > Yumin Qi has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Reorder including header files, remove unused function > dd_to_dump_time_lambda_proxy_class_dictionary > > _Mailing list message from [David Holmes](mailto:david.hol...@oracle.com) > > on [hotspot-runtime-dev](mailto:hotspot-runtime-...@mail.openjdk.java.net):_ > > On 24/06/2021 2:23 am, Yumin Qi wrote: > > > On Wed, 23 Jun 2021 06:08:41 GMT, Yumin Qi wrote: > > > > Hi, Please review > > > > systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to split > > > > it into functional files. Moved security and jar operation related code > > > > into CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info > > > > (DumpTime/RunTime) to sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy > > > > related to lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way > > > > systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and light. > > > > Tests: tier1,tier3,tier4 > > > > Thanks > > > > Yumin > > > > > > > > > > _Mailing list message from [David Holmes](mailto:david.holmes at > > > > oracle.com) on [build-dev](mailto:build-dev at mail.openjdk.java.net):_ > > > > Hi Yumin, > > > > On 23/06/2021 4:19 pm, Yumin Qi wrote: > > > > > Hi, Please review > > > > > systemDictionaryShared becomes fatter and fatter so it is time to > > > > > split it into functional files. Moved security and jar operation > > > > > related code into CDSProtectionDomain, and moved shared class info > > > > > (DumpTime/RunTime) to sharedClassInfo.[ch]pp, also moved lambda proxy > > > > > related to lambdaProxyClassInfo.hpp. This way > > > > > systemDictionaryShared.cpp looks neat and light. > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not really seeing a consistent or recognisable naming pattern here. > > > > We seem to have a mix of: > > > > > > > > * cds/foo.cpp > > > > * cds/fooShared.cpp > > > > * cds/sharedFoo.cpp > > > > Can we establish a simple naming scheme here? > > > > Thanks, > > > > David > > > > > > > > > Thanks David. I was thinking of that too. The best practice is for a > > > class Foo we have foo.hpp for definition and foo.cpp for implementation. > > > Here indeed exists non-consistency that I put DumpTime/RunTtime in a > > > single file. Let me double check and update. > > > > > > That's not what I was saying. I'm talking about the names of the cpp > > file and whether they contain "shared" and whether it is a prefix or > > postfix. There doesn't seem to be a consistent naming scheme employed here. > > That comes from day one. The case class FooShared is like > cds/fooShared.[ch]pp > Usually it is for a class with counterpart of a non-shared version, like > Metaspace, SystemDictionary etc. > The classes [DumpTime/RunTime]SharedClassInfo are used for shared only, they > don't have non-shared version. The "Shared" embedded just an indication of > used in CDS, without it is OK i think. I agree that it's fine to drop the word "Shared" from the [DumpTime/RunTime]SharedClassInfo so the the new files could be named [dump|run]TimeClassInfo.[c|h]pp instead. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4568
