got it.

LGTM.

--alex

On 10/10/2018 19:03, JC Beyler wrote:
Hi Alex,

Thanks for the review! Yes I had seen that too before sending this review out and forked that fix into this:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211905

Which now is merged and I've updated my webrev to reflect this of course.

My rationale for not doing it here directly is always the same: keeping the changes to the "spirit" of what the change is trying to do. Those extra casts were a bit out-of-scope and so I just forked the fix in 8211905.

Thanks!
Jc

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 5:40 PM Alex Menkov <alexey.men...@oracle.com <mailto:alexey.men...@oracle.com>> wrote:

    Hi Jc,

    Overall looks good.

    one minor note:

    
test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/events/EM06/em06t001/em06t001.cpp:
    -    jclassName = (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring)
    (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) NSK_CPP_STUB3(CallObjectMethod,
    jni_env, klass,
    -                        methodID);
    +    jclassName = (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring)
    (jstring) (jstring) (jstring) (jstring)
    jni_env->CallObjectMethod(klass,
    methodID);

    Please drop multi "(jstring)"

    --alex

    On 10/08/2018 21:21, JC Beyler wrote:
     > Hi all,
     >
     > I am continuing the NSK_CPP_STUB removal with this next webrev.
     > Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/
    <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/>
     > <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/>
     > Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211899
     >
     > The change is still straight-forward though, since it is just
    doing the
     > same NSK_CPP_STUB removal. However when I was looking at the
    changes, a
     > lot of these changes are touching lines with spaces before/after
     > parenthesis. I've almost never touched the spaces except if I was
     > refactoring by hand the line at the same time. The rationale
    being that
     > the lines will get fixed a few more times and are, at worse,
    covered by
     > the bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211335, which
    I've
     > commited to doing.
     >
     > Two exceptions are here where I pushed out the code into
    assignments due
     > to really long lines and complex if structures:
     > - jvmti/scenarios/hotswap/HS204/hs204t003/hs204t003.cpp
     >
    
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/hotswap/HS204/hs204t003/hs204t003.cpp.udiff.html>
     > - jvmti/scenarios/jni_interception/JI01/ji01t001/ji01t001.cpp
     >
    
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/jni_interception/JI01/ji01t001/ji01t001.cpp.udiff.html>
     >
     > And one exception here where a commented line was doing the
    out-of-if
     > assignment so I just uncommented it and used the variable:
     > - jvmti/scenarios/hotswap/HS301/hs301t001/hs301t001.cpp
     >
    
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8211899/webrev.00/test/hotspot/jtreg/vmTestbase/nsk/jvmti/scenarios/hotswap/HS301/hs301t001/hs301t001.cpp.udiff.html>
     >
     > I've tested the modified changes on my machine, all modified
    tests pass.
     >
     > Let me know what you think,
     > Jc
     >
     > Ps: 2 more of these and we can say good bye to NSK_CPP_STUB*
     >



--

Thanks,
Jc

Reply via email to