Re: RFR (S/T): 8231737: Cleanup JvmtiRawMonitor code

[serguei.spit...@oracle.com]

Hi David, Looks good in general. A couple of places still need a cleanup. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8231737/webrev/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.hpp.frames.html QNode pointer is not unified: 47 QNode * volatile _next; 48 QNode * volatile _prev; 68 void simpleEnter(Thread * self) ; 69 void simpleExit(Thread * self) ; but: 53 QNode(Thread* thread); 56 Thread* volatile _owner; // pointer to owning thread 58 QNode* volatile _entryList; // Threads blocked on entry or reentry.  61 QNode* volatile _waitSet; // Threads wait()ing on the monitor There are more places where a space is placed or not between the type name and the '*'. Missed space before ';': 68 void simpleEnter(Thread * self) ; 69 void simpleExit(Thread * self) ; 70 int simpleWait(Thread * self, jlong millis) ; 71 void simpleNotify(Thread * self, bool all) ; http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8231737/webrev/src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiRawMonitor.cpp.frames.html Space is not needed after the cast: 280 jt = (JavaThread*) self; 370 jt = (JavaThread*) self; Other places do not have it: 150 OrderAccess::release_store(&_owner, (Thread*)NULL); 288 contended = Atomic::cmpxchg(jt, &_owner, (Thread*)NULL); 291 contended = Atomic::cmpxchg(self, &_owner, (Thread*)NULL); Thanks, Serguei On 10/7/19 18:58, David Holmes wrote: Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8231737 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dholmes/8231737/webrev/ Stylistic code cleanup of JvmtiRawMonitor code as previously promised: - Self -> self - SimpleX -> simpleX - Contended -> contended - Node -> node - TState -> tState (variable name) - _WaitSet -> _waitSet - _EntryList -> _entryList; - All -> all - remove extra space before ( in function calls - remove extra space before ; - remove extra space before ++ and -- - add spaces around binary operators - use { } on all blocks - use one statement per line. - fix indent and alignment (ie remove artificial alignment) Probably simplest to look at new code and see if it looks okay rather than trying to spot each individual change. :) Thanks, David