JVM interface header src location?

[Andrew Leonard]

Eclipse OpenJ9 for example imitates the jvm.h interface without any change 
to it, so in essence they treat it as a defined "interface", but as you 
say it's really not a "supported" one, so I can understand both sides...


Andrew Leonard
Java Runtimes Development
IBM Hursley
IBM United Kingdom Ltd
Phone internal: 245913, external: 01962 815913
internet email: andrew_m_leonard at uk.ibm.com 




From:   mandy chung <mandy.chung at oracle.com>
To:     David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com>, Andrew Leonard 
<andrew_m_leonard at uk.ibm.com>
Cc:     hotspot-dev at openjdk.java.net
Date:   11/01/2018 23:27
Subject:        Re: JVM interface header src location?





On 1/11/18 2:01 PM, David Holmes wrote:

Wouldn't it be better for these headers to be under some generic "jvm" or 
"base" include folder? 

It would solve your problem. :) And I'm not opposed to moving them as a 
convenience to you. My main concern would be that this is not seen as a 
supported, exported, external contract between the JDK libraries and any 
VM. I would still consider it a private interface between the JDK and 
hotspot that changes whenever hotspot (or the JDK) needs it to. 


Right.  It's internal interface between JDK and hotspot.  
src/java.base/share/include wasn't the desired location for it and hence 
the relocation. 

Would it be an alternative if the source location of these header files 
can be configured at build time so that other JVM implementor can build 
JDK with an alternate location?   I would expect that other VM 
implementation would have to do some work for any change to jvm.h 
regardless of where it's located.  The extra (hopefully minimal) work is 
to update its own copy of jvm.h.

Mandy


Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU