RFR: 8284016: Normalize handshake closure names

[Serguei Spitsyn]

On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 09:10:26 GMT, Anton Artemov <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi, please consider the following changes:
> 
> There are many classes inherited from the `HandshakeClosure` class, but they do not follow the same naming convention. In this PR we address this issue, all names are normalized in the following way:
> 
> `XXXDummyClassNameClosure -> XXXDummyClassNameHandshakeClosure`
> 
> or
> 
> `XXXDummyClassNameHandshake -> XXXDummyClassNameHandshakeClosure`
> 
> or
> 
> `XXXStrangeClassName -> SomewhatSimilarNameHandshakeClosure`
> 
> Tested in GHA and tiers 1 - 3.

Changes requested by sspitsyn (Reviewer).

src/hotspot/share/prims/jvmtiEnvBase.hpp line 511:

> 509: };
> 510: 
> 511: class SetForceEarlyReturnHandshakeClosure : public JvmtiUnitedHandshakeClosure {

I do not support this unification over JVMTI files. This make `HandshakeClosure` class names too long.
The JVMTI has a consistent local naming convention to have the suffix `Closure` at the end instead of `HandshakeClosure`. And it is fine because normally there are no other kind of closures in JVMTI code.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26014#pullrequestreview-2967650296
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26014#discussion_r2172691167