On Thu, 4 Jun 2026 06:48:58 GMT, ExE Boss <[email protected]> wrote:

>> David Simms has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a 
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 2754 commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'valhalla/lworld' into 
>> jep401_sub_review_8317279
>>  - Merge
>>    
>>    Merge jdk-27+24
>>  - 8385674: [lworld] TestNullableInlineTypes.java fails after JDK-8325632
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: mchevalier
>>  - 8385652: [lworld] RedefineClasses should use stack map frame name
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: fparain
>>  - 8384107: [lworld] Update runtime/contended tests to run the same testing 
>> for value classes
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: fparain, lmesnik
>>  - 8385600: [lworld] DA/DU issues with strict fields
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: vromero
>>  - 8384897: [lworld] this.staticField should be restricted in early 
>> construction context
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: liach, vromero
>>  - 8385601: [lworld] Update testing documentation for the ValueClassPlugin 
>> jtreg option
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: lmesnik
>>  - 8385569: [lworld] Apply JDK-8343767 to Valhalla specific StubRoutines
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: fparain, vlivanov
>>  - 8385581: [lworld] Remove the experimental JVMCI feature
>>    8382708: [lworld] JVMCI support for Value Objects
>>    8372605: [lworld] 
>> compiler/jvmci/jdk.vm.ci.runtime.test/src/jdk/vm/ci/runtime/test/TestResolvedJava*.java
>>  fail with --enable-preview
>>    
>>    Reviewed-by: thartmann
>>  - ... and 2744 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/2c7efc08...9e804255
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/runtime/ValueObjectMethods.java line 
> 142:
> 
>> 140:                 long la = U.getLong(obj, offset);
>> 141:                 result = 31 * result + (int) la;
>> 142:                 result = 31 * result + (int) (la >>> 32);
> 
> This should probably use the behaviour of `Long::hashCode`:
> Suggestion:
> 
>                 result = 31 * result + (int) (la ^ (la >>> 32));
> 
> or
> Suggestion:
> 
>                 result = 31 * result + Long.hashCode(la);

I don't think we are bound to use a particular behavior. The original behavior 
does not introduce an inconsistency so I think it's fine to leave it as-is. We 
might change these calculations if there are more compelling reasons for 
subsequent previews, such as if another way to accumulate the result is more 
hardware-friendly.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31123#discussion_r3544501191

Reply via email to