On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 01:14:20 GMT, Rui Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> Backport of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8361497
>
> Not clean due to the lack of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8360884. The
> cherry pick conflict was caused by the a new test added in the JDK-8360884.,
> [code](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/4df9c873452293ccde3c7dbcd64e1ced6b6af52e#diff-314e483e41a8dd49577b207c12683b369ab87b6de6da289b9f7e89aae5f412cbR227-R232).
> Based on the conversation in
> [JDK-8360884](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8360884), it seems people
> are not comfortable to backport JDK-8360884 into 25 yet. The conflict was
> easy to resolve tho. Just remove the additional test brought by JDK-8360884.
src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/ScopedValue.java line 597:
> 595: Object value = scopedValueBindings().find(this);
> 596: boolean found = (value != Snapshot.NIL);
> 597: if (found) Cache.put(this, value);
Suggestion:
if (found) Cache.put(this, value);
test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/ScopedValues.java line 240:
> 238: // Test 6: Performance with a large number of bindings
> 239: static final long deepCall(ScopedValue<Integer> outer, long n) {
> 240: long result = 0;
This could be defined below, only if `n <= 0`
test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/lang/ScopedValues.java line 245:
> 243: return where(sv, n).call(() -> deepCall(outer, n - 1));
> 244: } else {
> 245: for (int i = 0; i < 1_000_000; i++) {
nit: you can reduce indentation by one level, the `else` clause is not needed
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306869898
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306867517
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26976#discussion_r2306865824
