RFR: 8357086: os::xxx functions returning memory size should return size_t [v31]

[Stefan Karlsson]

On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:48:26 GMT, Anton Artemov <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi,
>> 
>> in this PR the output value types for functions which return memory are changed, namely:
>> 
>> 
>> static julong available_memory(); --> static bool available_memory(size_t& value);
>> static julong used_memory(); --> static bool used_memory(size_t& value);
>> static julong free_memory(); --> static bool free_memory(size_t& value); 
>> static jlong total_swap_space(); --> static bool total_swap_space(size_t& value);
>> static jlong free_swap_space(); --> static bool free_swap_space(size_t& value); 
>> static julong physical_memory(); --> static size_t physical_memory(size_t& value); 
>> 
>> 
>> The return boolean value, where available, indicates success, whereas the actual value is assigned to the input argument. The following recommended usage pattern is introduced: where applicable, an unsuccessful call is logged. 
>> 
>> `ATTRIBUTE_NODISCARD` macro is added as a placeholder for `[[nodiscard]]`, which will be available with C++17.
>> 
>> Tested in GHA and Tiers 1-5.
>
> Anton Artemov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8357086: Addressed reviewers' comments

src/hotspot/os/windows/os_windows.cpp line 882:

> 880:     return true;
> 881:   } else {
> 882:     assert(false, "GlobalMemoryStatusEx failed in win32::total_swap_space(): %lu", ::GetLastError());

Suggestion:

    assert(false, "GlobalMemoryStatusEx failed in os::total_swap_space(): %lu", ::GetLastError());

src/hotspot/os/windows/os_windows.cpp line 895:

> 893:     return true;
> 894:   } else {
> 895:     assert(false, "GlobalMemoryStatusEx failed in win32::free_swap_space(): %lu", ::GetLastError());

Suggestion:

    assert(false, "GlobalMemoryStatusEx failed in os::free_swap_space(): %lu", ::GetLastError());

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25450#discussion_r2290418209
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25450#discussion_r2290418787