Hey all,
You're right, keeping this on info level makes more sense. I'll fix this
before pushing.
Thanks for reviewing!
Regards,
Marcus
On 2015-11-23 05:56, David Holmes wrote:
On 21/11/2015 7:58 AM, Coleen Phillimore wrote:
Hi Marcus,
This looks good, except I have one question:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8143229/webrev.00/src/share/vm/logging/logConfiguration.cpp.udiff.html
Shouldn't this be log_develop_info(logging) not trace? Why did you pick
trace?
I agree it should be info. The availability of develop logging should
be reported as a "first-class" piece of information in a develop build.
Otherwise seems okay - though I'm still trying to come to grips with
UL as a whole. :)
Thanks,
David
thanks,
Coleen
On 11/20/15 6:58 AM, Marcus Larsson wrote:
Hi,
Please review the following patch to replace the previous 'develop'
level with macros, in the unified logging framework.
The macros are essentially regular log calls inside a #ifndef PRODUCT.
In the product they do nothing / return false.
This allows the regular log levels to be used for develop-only logging.
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mlarsson/8143229/webrev.00/
Issue:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8143229
Thanks,
Marcus
