RFR: 8223066: jfr metadata" output the @Name annotation twice

[Erik Gahlin]

Hi Chihiro, 

I’m sorry, I have not been able to come to a conclusion on how to proceed.

I did try to remove the @MetadataDefinition (case 1), but it had a wider impact than I thought and I don’t think we should change things unless we are 100% sure. Your latest change (case 2) also impacts consumers of the event API. 

My approach was therefore to go back and just fix the ‘jfr’ tool (case 3), which was the original bug you filed and sent out a patch for. Regardless if 1 or 2 will be implemented in the future, this should be a solid fix.

I have assigned the bug back to you. See my webrev as a revirew comment on your original patch.

Thanks
Erik

> On 17 Jan 2020, at 07:48, Chihiro Ito <chiroito107 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Erik,
> 
> So you decided on the revision policy.
> For this bug, I have already written a patch and I am waiting for you to finish the discussion of the fix policy and review the patch.
> 
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-jfr-dev/2019-May/000559.html <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-jfr-dev/2019-May/000559.html>
> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-jfr-dev/2019-May/000562.html <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-jfr-dev/2019-May/000562.html>
> 
> webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cito/JDK-8223066/webrev.01/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~cito/JDK-8223066/webrev.01/>
> 
> Regards,
> Chihiro
> 
> 2020年1月16日(木) 23:35 Erik Gahlin <erik.gahlin at oracle.com <mailto:erik.gahlin at oracle.com>>:
> Hi,
> 
> Could I have a review of a fix that makes sure @Name annotation is not 
> printed twice.
> 
> There are multiple things at hand:
> 
> 1) What will produced in the file
> 2) What the consumer API exposes
> 3) What the 'jfr' tool prints.
> 
> This fix will only deal with 3.
> 
> Regardless if 1 are fixed later, old recordings can be printed by a 
> newer JDKs so this fix is needed anyway. Doing 1 and 2 is more 
> complicated as there are compatibility aspects and consistency of the 
> API to think about.
> 
> Types that lacks a package name will not get the @Name annotation as it 
> is not needed to describe them.
> 
> Thanks to Chihiro for finding the issue and doing initial work on this.
> 
> Bug:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223066 <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223066>
> 
> Webrev:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~egahlin/8223066/ <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~egahlin/8223066/>
> 
> Testing:
> jdk/jdk/jfr
> 
> Thanks
> Erik
>