Gate IDENTITY modifier on Valhalla preview features in native code#23286
Conversation
|
@hangshao0 @theresa-m can you please review this |
a57421e to
00d2a6e
Compare
keithc-ca
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changes are also required in runtime/vm/FastJNI_java_lang_Class.cpp and runtime/vm/romclasses.c.
|
Please address all feedback, including #23286 (review), before requesting the next review. |
44721ba to
8d1b758
Compare
|
Please update the commit message: This is more about correcting the behavior of the JVM than fixing a test. Yes, it's important that we address test failures, and it's reasonable to elaborate on that in the body of the commit message, but the summary line should be about what the change will do the the JVM. The title of the pull request and the description should be consistent with that updated commit message. |
8d1b758 to
e5182bb
Compare
Please also do that. |
This change fixes JVM behavior related to the IDENTITY modifier. The JVM should report the IDENTITY modifier only when Valhalla preview features are enabled at runtime. The native implementation is updated to check the preview runtime flag before reporting the modifier. This change also fixes IsIdentityTest failures, including array cases. Signed-off-by: Konark Shah <konarkshah2010@gmail.com>
e5182bb to
c69772a
Compare
|
@dsouzai Can you review or recommend a reviewer for the JIT changes here? |
Once double checked, please confirm if they are all passing. |
yes am checking the functional tests and the OpenJDK test will update here once done |
Yeah I think Annabelle and/or Henry are appropriate reviewers for this. |
hzongaro
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the JIT compiler changes look correct. Thanks!
|
Jenkins test sanity.functional,extended xlinuxval jdknext |
|
There is one of the functional test failing when I checked on my local, am fixing it, will update here once done |
Which test is that? None failed in the build I launched. |
Yes, actually the one which failed was due to my Mac so that can be ignored, so functional tests are good |
|
Also I confirmed the OPEN-JDK tests are passing here is the link to it https://hyc-runtimes-jenkins.swg-devops.com/job/Grinder/58045/ , so now the PR should be good to move ahead |
|
@hangshao0 @theresa-m Could you please complete your reviews? |
| } else { | ||
| rawModifiers &= Modifier.PUBLIC | Modifier.PRIVATE | Modifier.PROTECTED | ||
| /*[IF INLINE-TYPES]*/ | ||
| | AccessFlag.IDENTITY.mask() | Modifier.STRICT |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you intend to remove this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
keith asked me to remove this #23286 (comment)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes okay. I believe the other uses of Modifier.Strict should also be removed to clean up old code as well @keithc-ca ? That can be a seperete change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I pointed out that strict does not apply to types, only methods; see #23286 (comment).
@konark2010 Could you look at this and open a PR if necessary. |
Description:
What changed:
Motivation:
Impact: