On Fri, 15 Aug 2025 06:49:57 GMT, Matthias Baesken <mbaes...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The fix looks reasonable. However, the discrepancy btw and AIX and others >> seems unnecessary complexity. I'd prefer having `ifdef` removed also. >> >> Looking at how these prints are used/tested, I believe `sa_mask` is not >> really needed and it doesn't seem very useful also. Therefore, I'd suggest >> removing it, just like what's done for AIX. My 2c. > >> The fix looks reasonable. However, the discrepancy btw and AIX and others >> seems unnecessary complexity. I'd prefer having `ifdef` removed also. >> >> Looking at how these prints are used/tested, I believe `sa_mask` is not >> really needed and it doesn't seem very useful also. Therefore, I'd suggest >> removing it, just like what's done for AIX. My 2c. > > That's fine . @MBaesken @albertnetymk Thanks for the feedback. I’ve removed the sa_mask printing as suggested. Please take another look when you have time. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26771#issuecomment-3190812148
