Re: RFR: 8289768: Clean up unused code [v2]

2022-07-07 Thread Chris Plummer
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 05:32:29 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: >> This patch removes many unused variables and one unused label reported by >> the compilers when relevant warnings are enabled. >> >> The unused code was found by compiling after removing `unused` from the list >> of disabled warnings

Re: RFR: 8289768: Clean up unused code [v3]

2022-07-08 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 07:08:46 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote: >> This patch removes many unused variables and one unused label reported by >> the compilers when relevant warnings are enabled. >> >> The unused code was found by compiling after removing `unused` from the list >> of disabled warnings

Re: RFR: 8293592: Remove JVM_StopThread, stillborn, and related cleanup

2022-09-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 23 Sep 2022 06:17:34 GMT, David Holmes wrote: > Now that Thread.stop has been degraded to throw > `UnsupportedOperationException` (JDK-8299610) the only direct source of async > exceptions is from JVMTI `StopThread`. We can remove the `JVM_StopThread` > code, remove the `stillborn` fie

Re: RFR: 8294321: Fix typos in files under test/jdk/java, test/jdk/jdk, test/jdk/jni [v2]

2022-10-04 Thread Chris Plummer
On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 15:32:11 GMT, Michael Ernst wrote: > The title was edited by someone other than me, as you can see from the PR > history. The PR title needs to match the CR synopsis, so update the CR first, and then update the PR. - PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10029

Re: RFR: 8295729: Add jcheck whitespace checking for properties files

2022-10-20 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 18:38:43 GMT, Andy Goryachev wrote: > `White space following the property value is not ignored, and is treated as > part of the property value.` Although I didn't know this was in the spec, I suspected it might be the case. When looking at the jdk.management.agent changes,

Re: RFR: 8295729: Add jcheck whitespace checking for properties files [v3]

2022-10-24 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:21:07 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the same >> whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious >> trailing whitespace changes. >> >> With the new Skara jcheck, it is possible to increas

Re: RFR: 8294321: Fix typos in files under test/jdk/java, test/jdk/jdk, test/jdk/jni [v2]

2022-10-27 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 7 Oct 2022 12:51:26 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Michael Ernst has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains six commits: >> >> - Reinstate typos in Apache code that is copied into the JDK >> - Merge ../jdk-openjdk into

Re: RFR: 8296546: Add @spec tags to API

2022-11-10 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 01:10:13 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > Please review a "somewhat automated" change to insert `@spec` tags into doc > comments, as appropriate, to leverage the recent new javadoc feature to > generate a new page listing the references to all external specifications > listed

Re: [jdk20] RFR: 8298133: JDK 20 RDP1 L10n resource files update - msgdrop 10 [v5]

2022-12-15 Thread Chris Plummer
On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 03:38:54 GMT, Damon Nguyen wrote: >> Open l10n drop >> All tests passed > > Damon Nguyen has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Revert old translation. Fix lang codes `src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/com/sun/tools` c

Re: RFR: 8303480: Miscellaneous fixes to mostly invisible doc comments

2023-03-02 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:03:44 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote: > Please review this superficial documentation cleanup that was triggered by > unrelated analysis of doc comments in JDK API. > > The only effect that this multi-area PR has on the JDK API Documentation > (i.e. the observable effect on the ge

Re: RFR: 8250596: Update remaining manpage references from "OS X" to "macOS"

2023-05-04 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 4 May 2023 15:50:02 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote: > Most of the manpages were updated a few years ago but some references remain. > This patch renames remaining references to "macOS". > > Please review. > > Thanks, > Adam The jstatd.1 and jstat.1 files look good. Copyrights need updating on

Re: RFR: 8315097: Rename createJavaProcessBuilder [v2]

2023-08-29 Thread Chris Plummer
On Tue, 29 Aug 2023 09:12:51 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: >> Rename createJavaProcessBuilder so that it is not used by mistake instead of >> createTestJvm. >> >> I have used the following sed script: `find -name "*.java" | xargs -n 1 sed >> -i -e >> "s/createJavaProcessBuilder(/createJavaProcessBu

Re: RFR: 8267174: Many test files have the wrong Copyright header

2023-09-05 Thread Chris Plummer
On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 22:49:41 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: > There are a number of files in the `test` directory that have an incorrect > copyright header, which includes the "classpath" exception text. This patch > removes that text from all test files that I could find it in. I did this > using a

Re: RFR: 8267174: Many test files have the wrong Copyright header

2023-09-06 Thread Chris Plummer
On Wed, 6 Sep 2023 16:06:29 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: > > I wonder if this is the right thing to do for the hprof files. I believe > > they originated from some hprof tools that we no longer ship. 3rd parties > > might choose to integrate them into their own tools. > > Do you think I should re

Re: RFR: 8338411: Implement JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security Manager

2024-10-15 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 13:52:24 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote: > This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security > Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The > [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the > main change

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120

2024-10-22 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:34:30 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: > After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in > the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the > effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the > unuse

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage [v3]

2024-10-29 Thread Chris Plummer
On Sun, 27 Oct 2024 06:25:02 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in >> the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the >> effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the >> u

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage [v4]

2024-10-31 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 07:18:35 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in >> the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the >> effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the >> u

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage [v7]

2024-11-11 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 11 Nov 2024 09:51:35 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in >> the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the >> effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the >> u

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage

2024-10-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 05:22:45 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> src/jdk.jdi/windows/native/libdt_shmem/shmem_md.c line 47: >> >>> 45: { >>> 46: void *mappedMemory; >>> 47: // HANDLE memHandle; >> >> Why comment out this one but not the one at line 88? It seems they are both >> equally problemat

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage

2024-10-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 05:23:39 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/log_messages.c line 53: >> >>> 51: #ifndef _WIN32 >>> 52: static MUTEX_T my_mutex = MUTEX_INIT; >>> 53: #endif >> >> The reason for no reference on windows is because of the following on >> window

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage [v2]

2024-10-31 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 07:13:56 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: > > I do wonder if mutex support can be implemented for Windows with > > Acquire/ReleaseSRWLockExclusive. I know it's not strictly needed, but it > > would be nice to have. Shame threads.h is not available with some Visual > > Studio versi

Re: RFR: 8342682: Errors related to unused code on Windows after 8339120 in dt_shmem jdwp security and jpackage

2024-10-23 Thread Chris Plummer
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 03:31:31 GMT, Julian Waters wrote: >> I'm not sure what you mean by "that one". It's the static one that should be >> removed. The local variables always hide the static, and there seems to be >> no reason for the value of memHandle to survive outside of the local scope >>

Re: RFR: 8357995: Use "stdin.encoding" for reading System.in with InputStreamReader/Scanner [core] [v3]

2025-06-02 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 19:50:10 GMT, Volkan Yazici wrote: >> Passes the `Charset` read from the `stdin.encoding` system property while >> creating `InputStreamReader` or `Scanner` instances for `System.in`. >> >> `stdin.encoding` is a recently added property for Java 25 in >> [JDK-8350703](https:/

Re: RFR: 8357995: Use "stdin.encoding" for reading System.in with InputStreamReader/Scanner [core] [v2]

2025-06-02 Thread Chris Plummer
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 19:27:08 GMT, Volkan Yazici wrote: >> Passes the `Charset` read from the `stdin.encoding` system property while >> creating `InputStreamReader` or `Scanner` instances for `System.in`. >> >> `stdin.encoding` is a recently added property for Java 25 in >> [JDK-8350703](https:/

Re: RFR: 8260555: Change the default TIMEOUT_FACTOR from 4 to 1

2025-08-12 Thread Chris Plummer
On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 17:01:41 GMT, Leo Korinth wrote: > sun/tools/jhsdb/BasicLauncherTest.java > I am unsure about this one, it has not failed on my runs before, even with a > timeout factor of 0.7, maybe I was unlucky. @lkorinth Can you send me a link to the failure? - PR Comment: