From azvegint at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 00:58:46 2024
From: azvegint at openjdk.org (Alexander Zvegintsev)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 00:58:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v2]
In-Reply-To: <H_UeyNzYYRcajebTTNQr42Ijpj0B5gK9RM9GS_WVI1E=.3d00aa9b-99e6-4941-99f9-f44a78c05aa5@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <H_UeyNzYYRcajebTTNQr42Ijpj0B5gK9RM9GS_WVI1E=.3d00aa9b-99e6-4941-99f9-f44a78c05aa5@github.com>
Message-ID: <7sYuojWQDsIRMswxvYS1uqj5_NepvjYfZjXT3Q7sTgQ=.817db01a-3ea3-4d3c-a7c5-d57b8be35c51@github.com>

On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 01:04:32 GMT, Alexander Zvegintsev <azvegint at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   8345143
>
> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/Popup.java line 247:
> 
>> 245:             // Try to set "always-on-top" for the popup window.
>> 246:             // Applets usually don't have sufficient permissions to do it.
>> 247:             // In this case simply ignore the exception.
> 
> Suggestion:

This can still be updated.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1865083798

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 04:23:46 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 04:23:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v3]
In-Reply-To: <7sYuojWQDsIRMswxvYS1uqj5_NepvjYfZjXT3Q7sTgQ=.817db01a-3ea3-4d3c-a7c5-d57b8be35c51@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <H_UeyNzYYRcajebTTNQr42Ijpj0B5gK9RM9GS_WVI1E=.3d00aa9b-99e6-4941-99f9-f44a78c05aa5@github.com>
 <7sYuojWQDsIRMswxvYS1uqj5_NepvjYfZjXT3Q7sTgQ=.817db01a-3ea3-4d3c-a7c5-d57b8be35c51@github.com>
Message-ID: <gaJPQ9n5vQpK7X1IAEQkFdyOthmabqMky0YbM6v6Nuw=.9c5789d1-0439-40e7-8601-e9edfadcf578@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 00:55:55 GMT, Alexander Zvegintsev <azvegint at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/Popup.java line 247:
>> 
>>> 245:             // Try to set "always-on-top" for the popup window.
>>> 246:             // Applets usually don't have sufficient permissions to do it.
>>> 247:             // In this case simply ignore the exception.
>> 
>> Suggestion:
>
> This can still be updated.

fixed

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1865204366

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 04:23:45 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 04:23:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v3]
In-Reply-To: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
Message-ID: <60yT3WANw9AZv4R8kKUPtf8bziCriK_I2-nk6Qn0jCA=.31992c2f-c8a2-497e-92ee-2f44c50caecc@github.com>

> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs

Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8345143

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files/a02cecb4..17302404

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=01-02

  Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 3 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22424/head:pull/22424

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424

From azvegint at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 04:40:42 2024
From: azvegint at openjdk.org (Alexander Zvegintsev)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 04:40:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v3]
In-Reply-To: <60yT3WANw9AZv4R8kKUPtf8bziCriK_I2-nk6Qn0jCA=.31992c2f-c8a2-497e-92ee-2f44c50caecc@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <60yT3WANw9AZv4R8kKUPtf8bziCriK_I2-nk6Qn0jCA=.31992c2f-c8a2-497e-92ee-2f44c50caecc@github.com>
Message-ID: <hpwrwg9UR8fB_RpAvBoau_sz06Y-wEbDLB1qSyeuRXo=.13e84185-f5ef-49de-9b89-922a12ffe660@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 04:23:45 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs
>
> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8345143

Marked as reviewed by azvegint (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#pullrequestreview-2471726576

From jwaters at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 12:05:43 2024
From: jwaters at openjdk.org (Julian Waters)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 12:05:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8342868: Errors related to unused code on
 Windows after 8339120 in core libs [v2]
In-Reply-To: <vT6zJlWPUg235GuAHNJbyAxkoONF2vljAuFTVygBoGk=.05690f62-9641-4990-855a-c908df24e064@github.com>
References: <otTjiRgCFQEeUbpfFTMzhXUVBU1cal8q_i7IrGs_n94=.c2f02ad8-6b0c-4daa-9995-8e4b42131eb4@github.com>
 <vT6zJlWPUg235GuAHNJbyAxkoONF2vljAuFTVygBoGk=.05690f62-9641-4990-855a-c908df24e064@github.com>
Message-ID: <V5yC-0mfNDp-H0P6UQbbgepqklSAq0eA-eMQ6sU7PH0=.d6e4e099-27fc-4f35-b0c5-ae36e626ef93@github.com>

On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 05:43:11 GMT, Julian Waters <jwaters at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the unused warnings and addressed all of them by commenting out the code as appropriate. I am confident that in many cases this simplistic approach of commenting out code does not fix the underlying issue, and the warning actually found a bug that should be fixed. In these instances, I will be aiming to fix these bugs with help from reviewers, so I recommend anyone reviewing who knows more about the code than I do to see whether there is indeed a bug that needs fixing in a different way than what I did
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove the got local

Keep it open Skara, I'm waiting for the other Pull Requests to be approved so I can do them all at once

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21654#issuecomment-2511352014

From naoto at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 17:08:56 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 17:08:56 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8343788: Provide means to alter lib/tzmappings
 entries on Windows
In-Reply-To: <z7j5vrQoWKMnE7_RsTMDFcs2XpHkzCw1t9rTBaMM2Kg=.6c2257e5-ccdb-4f04-90e5-22e2341a2678@github.com>
References: <z7j5vrQoWKMnE7_RsTMDFcs2XpHkzCw1t9rTBaMM2Kg=.6c2257e5-ccdb-4f04-90e5-22e2341a2678@github.com>
Message-ID: <-eF98J84vSxXjEor6sQJwtj9qoywQX-5HimNe7YpcRI=.e00ba669-0c3e-4ac6-8aa4-d3eb406c9d5e@github.com>

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 17:31:42 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Windows Java runtime has a mapping file /lib/tzmappings which maps Windows time zones to Java's time zones. The file is generated based on CLDR's windowsZones.xml, but in rare occasions, its update is out of sync with Windows updates. This enhancement is to address those discrepancies for the time being (till CLDR/Windows are in sync). This change will also address zone mapping discrepancies in the update releases where CLDR versions stay the same.

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22250#issuecomment-2512177124

From naoto at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 17:08:57 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 17:08:57 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8343788: Provide means to alter
 lib/tzmappings entries on Windows
In-Reply-To: <z7j5vrQoWKMnE7_RsTMDFcs2XpHkzCw1t9rTBaMM2Kg=.6c2257e5-ccdb-4f04-90e5-22e2341a2678@github.com>
References: <z7j5vrQoWKMnE7_RsTMDFcs2XpHkzCw1t9rTBaMM2Kg=.6c2257e5-ccdb-4f04-90e5-22e2341a2678@github.com>
Message-ID: <oTYCIvlBrmhbsJRA2ZFrxnUzyz7jDdnGIDqy6V3bJ1I=.291828f4-8ec6-49fb-aa85-81783a120f9b@github.com>

On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 17:31:42 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Windows Java runtime has a mapping file /lib/tzmappings which maps Windows time zones to Java's time zones. The file is generated based on CLDR's windowsZones.xml, but in rare occasions, its update is out of sync with Windows updates. This enhancement is to address those discrepancies for the time being (till CLDR/Windows are in sync). This change will also address zone mapping discrepancies in the update releases where CLDR versions stay the same.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 352201dd
Author:    Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/352201ddecb048fe41bdf68d775a0a6cb2080122
Stats:     54 lines in 2 files changed: 53 ins; 0 del; 1 mod

8343788: Provide means to alter lib/tzmappings entries on Windows

Reviewed-by: joehw

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22250

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 18:49:58 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 18:49:58 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v4]
In-Reply-To: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
Message-ID: <Om8-5mwBgMlnXGYO5zu9142p7OP2AKJO5WfD4vvu-JY=.983adf9a-9e39-4335-ad13-abb98100d114@github.com>

> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs

Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8345143

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files/17302404..c4810ca7

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=03
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=02-03

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22424/head:pull/22424

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 18:57:58 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 18:57:58 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v5]
In-Reply-To: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
Message-ID: <dTOQUSZZB12Q9wMn-IX3LT2fGPCtAzmBXotZTDIgsH4=.d0204496-23eb-4e67-a20f-4352a9e62341@github.com>

> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs

Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8345143

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files/c4810ca7..89c21e97

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=04
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=03-04

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22424/head:pull/22424

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 19:01:06 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 19:01:06 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
Message-ID: <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>

> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs

Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  8345143

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424/files/89c21e97..046edd8c

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=05
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22424&range=04-05

  Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22424/head:pull/22424

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:16:54 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:16:54 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
Message-ID: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>

Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.

Dependent on PR#22418

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

Depends on: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22418

Commit messages:
 - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345325
  Stats: 184 lines in 10 files changed: 0 ins; 174 del; 10 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22497/head:pull/22497

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497

From lancea at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:21:39 2024
From: lancea at openjdk.org (Lance Andersen)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:21:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <4g-Q8_Y2ArAR3aXJZKfoko_qoDiTYCel4-WV5eb1pBc=.e38e828d-bb11-423e-85db-0e21ad0ae956@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:12:39 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

Changes Look Good Roger

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

Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2473825040

From alanb at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:21:40 2024
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:21:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <Ji3tYVllUY4TQatzcyjLn-GZt3ofJkAIj4i4ACIQjRE=.3450cb9b-f6f2-4b09-b8ad-142064f7ef5c@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:12:39 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandleNatives.java line 710:

> 708: 
> 709:     static {
> 710:         Properties props = GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetProperties();

This is probably the last usage of Properties.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1866556255

From naoto at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:31:38 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:31:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <vT8RWhGY5Awb83R6YPDVcb1h8mijqRjqmNdnKfVwTso=.0c069346-ed1a-4f95-90a8-7bcb77570b55@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:12:39 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

LGTM

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

Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2473841217

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:31:39 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:31:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
In-Reply-To: <Ji3tYVllUY4TQatzcyjLn-GZt3ofJkAIj4i4ACIQjRE=.3450cb9b-f6f2-4b09-b8ad-142064f7ef5c@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Ji3tYVllUY4TQatzcyjLn-GZt3ofJkAIj4i4ACIQjRE=.3450cb9b-f6f2-4b09-b8ad-142064f7ef5c@github.com>
Message-ID: <r58HdHg7Y9o4qjrcahAetyhqJltbpOTBpFcHvYicEEk=.94bace7f-e0ce-444e-a87c-1fff7863d78f@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:19:23 GMT, Alan Bateman <alanb at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandleNatives.java line 710:
> 
>> 708: 
>> 709:     static {
>> 710:         Properties props = GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetProperties();
> 
> This is probably the last usage of Properties.

Yes, with Sean's changes in #22418, GetPropertyAction et.al. is deleted.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1866566036

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:47:16 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:

 - Remove unused import of Properties
 - Update copyrights
   Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files/683b008e..d6586f9b

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=00-01

  Stats: 52 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 49 del; 3 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22497/head:pull/22497

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497

From mchung at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:47:16 2024
From: mchung at openjdk.org (Mandy Chung)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
Message-ID: <9ZOAyA1fSdjH22fEOUPJq9_pvi9QQYv5vIGD5_DxFfA=.d900b0aa-0d24-4021-92ab-708cbb95b29e@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:44:05 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test

LGTM

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

Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2473865834

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:47:16 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <r58HdHg7Y9o4qjrcahAetyhqJltbpOTBpFcHvYicEEk=.94bace7f-e0ce-444e-a87c-1fff7863d78f@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Ji3tYVllUY4TQatzcyjLn-GZt3ofJkAIj4i4ACIQjRE=.3450cb9b-f6f2-4b09-b8ad-142064f7ef5c@github.com>
 <r58HdHg7Y9o4qjrcahAetyhqJltbpOTBpFcHvYicEEk=.94bace7f-e0ce-444e-a87c-1fff7863d78f@github.com>
Message-ID: <1Xm5gSud354bl56Yd-ccM_WHG0t42zEECqBWOzXQRzU=.8152e918-1129-4a64-a691-b2adefd6f40a@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:28:13 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandleNatives.java line 710:
>> 
>>> 708: 
>>> 709:     static {
>>> 710:         Properties props = GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetProperties();
>> 
>> This is probably the last usage of Properties.
>
> Yes, with Sean's changes in #22418, GetPropertyAction et.al. is deleted.

@RogerRiggs Alan may have referred to the import of `java.util.Properties`.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1866579197

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 20:47:16 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <1Xm5gSud354bl56Yd-ccM_WHG0t42zEECqBWOzXQRzU=.8152e918-1129-4a64-a691-b2adefd6f40a@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Ji3tYVllUY4TQatzcyjLn-GZt3ofJkAIj4i4ACIQjRE=.3450cb9b-f6f2-4b09-b8ad-142064f7ef5c@github.com>
 <r58HdHg7Y9o4qjrcahAetyhqJltbpOTBpFcHvYicEEk=.94bace7f-e0ce-444e-a87c-1fff7863d78f@github.com>
 <1Xm5gSud354bl56Yd-ccM_WHG0t42zEECqBWOzXQRzU=.8152e918-1129-4a64-a691-b2adefd6f40a@github.com>
Message-ID: <bcdnNKKHFQNsjIxvexpiGy1ayB-gPcnCPRXPjbib_Sc=.c03cb57b-b289-44b1-a551-8778def56c79@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:40:23 GMT, Eirik Bj?rsn?s <eirbjo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Yes, with Sean's changes in #22418, GetPropertyAction et.al. is deleted.
>
> @RogerRiggs Alan may have referred to the import of `java.util.Properties`.

Right, thanks

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1866581277

From azvegint at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 21:08:46 2024
From: azvegint at openjdk.org (Alexander Zvegintsev)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 21:08:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
Message-ID: <X2aGe2NtfqFDPnELVFb0wLbVa5p1IJHsWZy2Bb1k2zY=.8d30281f-56cf-4c3e-927c-10d78155d652@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 19:01:06 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs
>
> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8345143

Marked as reviewed by azvegint (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#pullrequestreview-2473924924

From mchung at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 21:15:42 2024
From: mchung at openjdk.org (Mandy Chung)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 21:15:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
Message-ID: <JoMHHbq-j6yTZjGnfB1TPEwMmK87eIokvycDKx7eGAM=.be559dcc-17bd-4955-bd39-346296e837dc@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test

Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2473937851

From mullan at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 22:05:40 2024
From: mullan at openjdk.org (Sean Mullan)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:05:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
Message-ID: <ZaWuiW0PPGaav4XzakpKHzdo3y0sVK2Ole1iY2Ru5Ws=.137fe53c-4113-4fb9-9d43-47f962e8ae87@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:47:16 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test

This includes a lot of changes already integrated in 8344397. Is that normal?

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#issuecomment-2513031346

From liach at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 22:35:38 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:35:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ZaWuiW0PPGaav4XzakpKHzdo3y0sVK2Ole1iY2Ru5Ws=.137fe53c-4113-4fb9-9d43-47f962e8ae87@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <k9iemWrcLWhTq7TAFZ71pO5hw6Z6gBJBESTVseb3lc0=.e8634633-f703-4d43-9d12-5b4c9c5c4ab0@github.com>
 <ZaWuiW0PPGaav4XzakpKHzdo3y0sVK2Ole1iY2Ru5Ws=.137fe53c-4113-4fb9-9d43-47f962e8ae87@github.com>
Message-ID: <14R-g7fDTxZCTaMkyOs_SbH8KOMUmimu4yz7uEpe8Qo=.2873489c-d6de-4b7d-a3fc-1cb1375ff51f@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:02:54 GMT, Sean Mullan <mullan at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This includes a lot of changes already integrated in 8344397. Is that normal?

I believe this is due to GitHub's diff rendering when it detects a merge conflict.  It should go away once the conflict is fixed.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#issuecomment-2513105799

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 22:51:55 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:

 - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
 - Remove unused import of Properties
 - Update copyrights
   Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
 - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
   Remove use of GetPropertyAction
   Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
 - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
   Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
   methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
 - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
   with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
   privilegedGetOverridable().
 - Merge
 - Remove doPrivileged calls.
 - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
 - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
 - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

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

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=02
  Stats: 236 lines in 11 files changed: 0 ins; 223 del; 13 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22497/head:pull/22497

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 22:54:42 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:54:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
Message-ID: <SqpIbGMMJC6glOqk0F7Rlffpg1BGntSFkwwZv0ZV_cw=.2f094dfa-171b-49b3-98f4-3a4963eabc4b@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>  - Merge
>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

The merge of master after integrating 8344397 looks to have resolved conflicts and only the intended changes remain.
I'll run a CI build to confirm tier1-3.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#issuecomment-2513145496

From darcy at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 23:02:41 2024
From: darcy at openjdk.org (Joe Darcy)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 23:02:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v4]
In-Reply-To: <xTxbdWdErCsY1XF0SBmcUb7t4iKeuyw6fVFHkEjQ49E=.ac5332aa-f18d-466a-ba74-7e21d8e552d8@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
 <xTxbdWdErCsY1XF0SBmcUb7t4iKeuyw6fVFHkEjQ49E=.ac5332aa-f18d-466a-ba74-7e21d8e552d8@github.com>
Message-ID: <J4vHbjKSzFeVxO7bEheccjArycoxytIiOu2tpycXbVs=.6abdb213-928e-4ce3-a6ad-8b5bf59a470f@github.com>

On Thu, 21 Nov 2024 06:53:58 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this PR and corresponding CSR which includes a wide range of specification improvements for java.util.Locale. See the CSR for further detail. Other changes/suggestions are welcomed to be included as part of this change.
>> 
>> APIDiff: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/8341923_apidiff/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>> Javadoc: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/api/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>
> Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   reflect review

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Locale.java line 76:

> 74:  * or cultural region. An API that requires a {@code Locale} to perform
> 75:  * its task is <em>locale-sensitive</em> and uses the {@code Locale}
> 76:  * to tailor information for the user. These <em>locale-sensitive</em> APIs

Either as part of this change or in follow-up work, please consider defining a user-index term for "locale
-sensitive".

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192#discussion_r1866741419

From honkar at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 23:18:43 2024
From: honkar at openjdk.org (Harshitha Onkar)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 23:18:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
Message-ID: <wWz0dXoh_kztnVxnAscb09PqXr5xJlxxhqf6V5UEprg=.d03c32e1-eb7f-4029-9adc-018d4fb42204@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 19:01:06 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs
>
> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8345143

LGTM

src/java.desktop/share/classes/javax/swing/DefaultListCellRenderer.java line 108:

> 106:         if (System.getSecurityManager() != null) {
> 107:             if (border != null) return border;
> 108:             return SAFE_NO_FOCUS_BORDER;

Changes looks good. SAFE_NO_FOCUS_BORDER no longer used.

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

Marked as reviewed by honkar (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#pullrequestreview-2474123132
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1866744305

From honkar at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  2 23:39:44 2024
From: honkar at openjdk.org (Harshitha Onkar)
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2024 23:39:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
Message-ID: <bf5nGTWaUUBlR39pcx4krN5oF_G10mOuvrE_hDmeGWg=.37249c42-1348-4b92-9f7f-a3954a7a7a40@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 19:01:06 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs
>
> Phil Race has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   8345143

test/jdk/lib/client/ExtendedRobot.java line 64:

> 62:     //    syncDelay = AccessController.doPrivileged(new GetIntegerAction("java.awt.robotdelay", DEFAULT_SYNC_DELAY));
> 63:     //}
> 64: 

Not related to this PR changes but since ExtendedRobot was mentioned here, I went through Robot.java and it has few SecurityException in javadoc [(as here)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/db85090553ab14a84c3ed0a2604dd56c5b6e6982/src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Robot.java#L506C1-L507C43). 
Will changes to Robot.java be handled as separate PR + CSR ?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1866768907

From prr at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 00:15:48 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 00:15:48 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <bf5nGTWaUUBlR39pcx4krN5oF_G10mOuvrE_hDmeGWg=.37249c42-1348-4b92-9f7f-a3954a7a7a40@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
 <bf5nGTWaUUBlR39pcx4krN5oF_G10mOuvrE_hDmeGWg=.37249c42-1348-4b92-9f7f-a3954a7a7a40@github.com>
Message-ID: <HPzW7aduchkPwTHbCTUX8R7PNkLQHtGVsTH2JUv71p8=.26c48e3a-840f-43df-a9af-f82db3ad2358@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 23:37:03 GMT, Harshitha Onkar <honkar at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Not related to this PR changes but since ExtendedRobot was mentioned here, I went through Robot.java and it has few SecurityException in javadoc [(as here)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/db85090553ab14a84c3ed0a2604dd56c5b6e6982/src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Robot.java#L506C1-L507C43). Will changes to Robot.java be handled as separate PR + CSR ?

We still use SecurityException in java.awt.Robot too. It is still needed for when the *desktop* denies access.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1866789983

From prr at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 00:15:49 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 00:15:49 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in
 the java.desktop module
In-Reply-To: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
Message-ID: <OD5ltkkrBB_BGipM4VFP6do06IXje7tRKrKYwiGbNXk=.c6d1a68d-70e5-4a8d-a2cf-7c6a2b1c239e@github.com>

On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:36:35 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove SecurityManager related code in the desktop module that is not covered by other PRs

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 3f6c0424
Author:    Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/3f6c04247ff6ad69330bc219ed26944852954e85
Stats:     279 lines in 34 files changed: 1 ins; 246 del; 32 mod

8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the java.desktop module

Reviewed-by: azvegint, honkar

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424

From honkar at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 00:26:53 2024
From: honkar at openjdk.org (Harshitha Onkar)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 00:26:53 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345143: Remove uses of SecurityManager in the
 java.desktop module [v6]
In-Reply-To: <HPzW7aduchkPwTHbCTUX8R7PNkLQHtGVsTH2JUv71p8=.26c48e3a-840f-43df-a9af-f82db3ad2358@github.com>
References: <mvc_W5nIwFPJuSCgaQolwQR2YeOEhjdKp8qeE4h8M_w=.9d1c7822-efc8-4e46-8e3c-205cb1665f37@github.com>
 <8VPCW7QNB0ZRmg9Jf3icbbBcau6Kd0Xt02u76LibBWU=.c9d22099-2636-46c7-b363-a6af335e8bd2@github.com>
 <bf5nGTWaUUBlR39pcx4krN5oF_G10mOuvrE_hDmeGWg=.37249c42-1348-4b92-9f7f-a3954a7a7a40@github.com>
 <HPzW7aduchkPwTHbCTUX8R7PNkLQHtGVsTH2JUv71p8=.26c48e3a-840f-43df-a9af-f82db3ad2358@github.com>
Message-ID: <U6Hgg5yfTeVAkyhCFSrgVJ6BFV9wykVaZ32ursDQsSw=.fc60c185-30ea-4219-8118-1d96828d5478@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 00:12:03 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/jdk/lib/client/ExtendedRobot.java line 64:
>> 
>>> 62:     //    syncDelay = AccessController.doPrivileged(new GetIntegerAction("java.awt.robotdelay", DEFAULT_SYNC_DELAY));
>>> 63:     //}
>>> 64: 
>> 
>> Not related to this PR changes but since ExtendedRobot was mentioned here, I went through Robot.java and it has few SecurityException in javadoc [(as here)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/db85090553ab14a84c3ed0a2604dd56c5b6e6982/src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Robot.java#L506C1-L507C43). 
>> Will changes to Robot.java be handled as separate PR + CSR ?
>
>> Not related to this PR changes but since ExtendedRobot was mentioned here, I went through Robot.java and it has few SecurityException in javadoc [(as here)](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/db85090553ab14a84c3ed0a2604dd56c5b6e6982/src/java.desktop/share/classes/java/awt/Robot.java#L506C1-L507C43). Will changes to Robot.java be handled as separate PR + CSR ?
> 
> We still use SecurityException in java.awt.Robot too. It is still needed for when the *desktop* denies access.

Makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22424#discussion_r1866797014

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 01:58:51 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 01:58:51 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
Message-ID: <Tqzx_QOAPUDoTxYIB9PDx-icvWHc78ki74UtzyOTLjU=.a514f9ed-3841-47a8-8c75-a2714412766c@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>  - Merge
>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

CI Tiers 1-3 passed except for an unrelated communication failure.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#issuecomment-2513367581

From naoto at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 02:11:41 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:11:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
Message-ID: <ROUmuUnITas_d1z0w2AvuZTgjFABWUWuKirOuwb-2QY=.8a86c600-1f61-4719-ab40-3f3e48d663b2@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>  - Merge
>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

Marked as reviewed by naoto (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2474337606

From jlu at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 02:29:16 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:29:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v5]
In-Reply-To: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
Message-ID: <aVaVg9JVtQcvW31fOopHZYHfskHcTxpwZL23s8z54Kg=.91ca613f-78b0-4ada-920c-4f25a03b3938@github.com>

> Please review this PR and corresponding CSR which includes a wide range of specification improvements for java.util.Locale. See the CSR for further detail. Other changes/suggestions are welcomed to be included as part of this change.
> 
> APIDiff: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/8341923_apidiff/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
> Javadoc: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/api/java.base/java/util/Locale.html

Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  define 'locale-sensitive' as an index term

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192/files/871d635a..61196f60

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22192&range=04
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22192&range=03-04

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22192/head:pull/22192

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192

From jlu at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 02:29:16 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:29:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v4]
In-Reply-To: <J4vHbjKSzFeVxO7bEheccjArycoxytIiOu2tpycXbVs=.6abdb213-928e-4ce3-a6ad-8b5bf59a470f@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
 <xTxbdWdErCsY1XF0SBmcUb7t4iKeuyw6fVFHkEjQ49E=.ac5332aa-f18d-466a-ba74-7e21d8e552d8@github.com>
 <J4vHbjKSzFeVxO7bEheccjArycoxytIiOu2tpycXbVs=.6abdb213-928e-4ce3-a6ad-8b5bf59a470f@github.com>
Message-ID: <nj9NWYQcc3tUt4MEOAMX5SachVyEoDqpfQBHSI24DOU=.632bec10-e4f4-4192-b6e7-d8e91c5df156@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 23:00:20 GMT, Joe Darcy <darcy at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   reflect review
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Locale.java line 76:
> 
>> 74:  * or cultural region. An API that requires a {@code Locale} to perform
>> 75:  * its task is <em>locale-sensitive</em> and uses the {@code Locale}
>> 76:  * to tailor information for the user. These <em>locale-sensitive</em> APIs
> 
> Either as part of this change or in follow-up work, please consider defining a user-index term for "locale
> -sensitive".

That's a good idea. Added in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22192/commits/61196f60d0722ad67cb0f1446e4fff520429b383.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192#discussion_r1866930016

From liach at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 04:16:41 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 04:16:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v5]
In-Reply-To: <aVaVg9JVtQcvW31fOopHZYHfskHcTxpwZL23s8z54Kg=.91ca613f-78b0-4ada-920c-4f25a03b3938@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
 <aVaVg9JVtQcvW31fOopHZYHfskHcTxpwZL23s8z54Kg=.91ca613f-78b0-4ada-920c-4f25a03b3938@github.com>
Message-ID: <FcjeMsOXFR0HPar1R0E7PuHMrKD8dG5bIjfo82FDgkQ=.3756edd4-85bb-41fa-be83-93660969049a@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:29:16 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this PR and corresponding CSR which includes a wide range of specification improvements for java.util.Locale. See the CSR for further detail. Other changes/suggestions are welcomed to be included as part of this change.
>> 
>> APIDiff: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/8341923_apidiff/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>> Javadoc: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/api/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>
> Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   define 'locale-sensitive' as an index term

The new index looks good. I think the quote is usually used for cases where the indexed term has spaces, but it should be fine here.

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

Marked as reviewed by liach (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192#pullrequestreview-2474514003

From darcy at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 04:22:41 2024
From: darcy at openjdk.org (Joe Darcy)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 04:22:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v4]
In-Reply-To: <nj9NWYQcc3tUt4MEOAMX5SachVyEoDqpfQBHSI24DOU=.632bec10-e4f4-4192-b6e7-d8e91c5df156@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
 <xTxbdWdErCsY1XF0SBmcUb7t4iKeuyw6fVFHkEjQ49E=.ac5332aa-f18d-466a-ba74-7e21d8e552d8@github.com>
 <J4vHbjKSzFeVxO7bEheccjArycoxytIiOu2tpycXbVs=.6abdb213-928e-4ce3-a6ad-8b5bf59a470f@github.com>
 <nj9NWYQcc3tUt4MEOAMX5SachVyEoDqpfQBHSI24DOU=.632bec10-e4f4-4192-b6e7-d8e91c5df156@github.com>
Message-ID: <8Qp7tZ4pmPRJhOPhh4aUKjjtnFE_jmRNLBa4cLkhEOs=.6b4fe0bc-774d-4409-b9af-e87e85a8354b@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:26:03 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Locale.java line 76:
>> 
>>> 74:  * or cultural region. An API that requires a {@code Locale} to perform
>>> 75:  * its task is <em>locale-sensitive</em> and uses the {@code Locale}
>>> 76:  * to tailor information for the user. These <em>locale-sensitive</em> APIs
>> 
>> Either as part of this change or in follow-up work, please consider defining a user-index term for "locale
>> -sensitive".
>
> That's a good idea. Added in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22192/commits/61196f60d0722ad67cb0f1446e4fff520429b383.

Thanks. (No update to the CSR is needed for adding the index term.)

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192#discussion_r1867012226

From alanb at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 07:41:40 2024
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 07:41:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
Message-ID: <HjVNPjrnYeF6aNNC48aHSR8sVsQfb4i3bU4WW0mGogU=.b6778583-98f9-4333-b3b0-d017e30a02ce@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>  - Merge
>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2474803070

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 09:43:40 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 09:43:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
Message-ID: <RYAL-jIBW4K4PFr-FwIZ_VLQBaD3RWySKmcO6597tyM=.576a3c62-00b3-412d-9dc8-1534915d882e@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 22:51:55 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>  - Update copyrights
>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>  - Merge
>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackStreamFactory.java line 87:

> 85:      * For Throwable to use StackWalker, set useNewThrowable to true.
> 86:      * Performance work and extensive testing is needed to replace the
> 87:      * VM built-in backtrace filled in Throwable with the StackWalker.

This leftover comment used to belong to the `useNewThrowable` field which was removed in merge commit 4db74fef1e73c008d044c681d26c7444b2245316 back in 2017.

You may consider removing it, since it now seems to belong to the `isDebug` field, which is not the case.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1867366019

From dmarkov at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 11:07:37 2024
From: dmarkov at openjdk.org (Dmitry Markov)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 11:07:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8324491: Keyboard layout did not keep it state
 if it was changed when dialog is active
In-Reply-To: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
References: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
Message-ID: <IpI9hkni7CSU6hLvY6f0UWujbqefnfhlfBKEokji18c=.2266af8f-ae83-4a00-8e45-89f21ed99c79@github.com>

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:47:29 GMT, Dmitry Markov <dmarkov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> If AWT/Swing app displays several windows and an user changes the keyboard layout and then closes the focused window, the app does not keep the keyboard layout changes.
> 
> It is necessary to sync currentLocale and Windows keyboard layout values in `WInputMethod` class before component activation.

Looking for volunteers to review the fix.
Thanks in advance

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22411#issuecomment-2514235130

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 14:45:22 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:45:22 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v4]
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Remove an obsolete comment related to long ago removed useNewThrowable

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497/files/4c855033..6cb9b557

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=03
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22497&range=02-03

  Stats: 5 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 5 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22497/head:pull/22497

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 14:45:23 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:45:23 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v3]
In-Reply-To: <RYAL-jIBW4K4PFr-FwIZ_VLQBaD3RWySKmcO6597tyM=.576a3c62-00b3-412d-9dc8-1534915d882e@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <gvMjCDBov2nVn3gJiorJRx7Oc3p6YK_B-U5Ey9fDiWw=.b237be48-329a-403e-b8bd-c555f3b993da@github.com>
 <RYAL-jIBW4K4PFr-FwIZ_VLQBaD3RWySKmcO6597tyM=.576a3c62-00b3-412d-9dc8-1534915d882e@github.com>
Message-ID: <rivIodYSMKFkiIX4XpSGRZpGA6y9R7f5B0_ok0o9Zy4=.9d10c41e-bc5d-448d-b829-f335c9e147a5@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 09:40:39 GMT, Eirik Bj?rsn?s <eirbjo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch 'master' into 8345325-sm-remove-getpropertyaction
>>  - Remove unused import of Properties
>>  - Update copyrights
>>    Remove jdk/sun/security/action/Generify test
>>  - 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base
>>    Remove use of GetPropertyAction
>>    Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java
>>  - Remove PutAllAction and GetBooleanAction classes as there are no more dependencies.
>>    Move GetPropertyAction.privilegedGetTimeoutProp and privilegedGetBooleanProp
>>    methods to sun.security.util.SecurityProperties and rename them.
>>  - Replace remaining calls to SecurityProperties.privilegedGetOverridable()
>>    with SecurityProperties.getOverridableProperty() and remove
>>    privilegedGetOverridable().
>>  - Merge
>>  - Remove doPrivileged calls.
>>  - Remove dependency on SecurityConstants.ALL_PERMISSION from java.lang.Class.
>>  - Remove permission text from comments in Provider.java.
>>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3a3bcd53...4c855033
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackStreamFactory.java line 87:
> 
>> 85:      * For Throwable to use StackWalker, set useNewThrowable to true.
>> 86:      * Performance work and extensive testing is needed to replace the
>> 87:      * VM built-in backtrace filled in Throwable with the StackWalker.
> 
> This leftover comment used to belong to the `useNewThrowable` field which was removed in merge commit 4db74fef1e73c008d044c681d26c7444b2245316 back in 2017.
> 
> You may consider removing it, since it now seems to belong to the `isDebug` field, which is not the case.

No time like the present

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1867849183

From alanb at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 14:48:43 2024
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:48:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v4]
In-Reply-To: <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>
Message-ID: <dRuGb8ArPSszUPHlzwJzJOSACKrlOMlk3PXhswxxsOc=.e33a56af-727c-4295-83a0-479865e046bc@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:45:22 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove an obsolete comment related to long ago removed useNewThrowable

Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#pullrequestreview-2475918375

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 14:56:44 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:56:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v4]
In-Reply-To: <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>
Message-ID: <RzosXc0LnQJWT4JOelBQI1C6wp3f3DbgzymdBRBLLPM=.f6829a18-d943-468d-9855-ca69afa2886f@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:45:22 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
>> 
>> Dependent on PR#22418
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove an obsolete comment related to long ago removed useNewThrowable

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackStreamFactory.java line 84:

> 82:     @Native private static final int FILL_LIVE_STACK_FRAMES    = 0x100;
> 83: 
> 84:     static final boolean isDebug =

This property should probably be compared with true in a case insensitive manner. It may be better to use `Boolean::getBoolean` instead.

Justification:

JDK-8155775 (commit e8cd76568da1b32b26491e80f498cff1409336b7) removed the `getProperty` method which was previously used to read this property:


private static boolean getProperty(String key, boolean value) {
        String s = GetPropertyAction.getProperty(key);
        if (s != null) {
            return Boolean.parseBoolean(s);
        }
        return value;
    }


`isDebug` was initialized with a false default if the system property was null:


final static boolean isDebug = getProperty("stackwalk.debug", false);
``` 

I doubt the change in case handling was intentional, @cl4es may confirm.

Based on the above, I think we should consider using Boolean.getBoolean here, as that is case-insensitive and returns false for null:

Suggestion:

    static final boolean isDebug = Boolean.getBoolean("stackwalk.debug");

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1867880288

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 14:59:44 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:59:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base [v4]
In-Reply-To: <RzosXc0LnQJWT4JOelBQI1C6wp3f3DbgzymdBRBLLPM=.f6829a18-d943-468d-9855-ca69afa2886f@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
 <Wm73eQDLij6vjqEptiqKiNt8pyiduJeTxmaciSVZZ14=.e9048cff-abc8-424e-9e9e-d64e63798793@github.com>
 <RzosXc0LnQJWT4JOelBQI1C6wp3f3DbgzymdBRBLLPM=.f6829a18-d943-468d-9855-ca69afa2886f@github.com>
Message-ID: <kyPFFVsx_44IgkRbfAMxiEEAplklTYkYTTfXJGVZcmA=.76523dca-8b09-4d9c-beb6-0d9f8b08ea22@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 14:53:41 GMT, Eirik Bj?rsn?s <eirbjo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Remove an obsolete comment related to long ago removed useNewThrowable
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StackStreamFactory.java line 84:
> 
>> 82:     @Native private static final int FILL_LIVE_STACK_FRAMES    = 0x100;
>> 83: 
>> 84:     static final boolean isDebug =
> 
> This property should probably be compared with true in a case insensitive manner. It may be better to use `Boolean::getBoolean` instead.
> 
> Justification:
> 
> JDK-8155775 (commit e8cd76568da1b32b26491e80f498cff1409336b7) removed the `getProperty` method which was previously used to read this property:
> 
> 
> private static boolean getProperty(String key, boolean value) {
>         String s = GetPropertyAction.getProperty(key);
>         if (s != null) {
>             return Boolean.parseBoolean(s);
>         }
>         return value;
>     }
> 
> 
> `isDebug` was initialized with a false default if the system property was null:
> 
> 
> final static boolean isDebug = getProperty("stackwalk.debug", false);
> ``` 
> 
> I doubt the change in case handling was intentional, @cl4es may confirm.
> 
> Based on the above, I think we should consider using Boolean.getBoolean here, as that is case-insensitive and returns false for null:
> 
> Suggestion:
> 
>     static final boolean isDebug = Boolean.getBoolean("stackwalk.debug");

Changing the behavior is out of scope for this pr.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497#discussion_r1867886415

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 15:02:46 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 15:02:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in
 java.base
In-Reply-To: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
References: <W-fOZcSql7Zen9vZdUH5jlPCHvRJQCW5tgnveTpcB5o=.4f98a9c6-73d0-45a2-9c07-79052c72f0d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <UHVaCNge_b1dPWLuDwz9FejIoDeo_PxVXUS_Ry-nNgA=.b3abaeaa-7f20-4f2b-91ce-615ebc6c7a68@github.com>

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 20:12:39 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove sun/security/action/GetPropertyAction.java and all uses.
> 
> Dependent on PR#22418

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: fcf185c8
Author:    Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/fcf185c8b425a6984eb145c3127f97e811d345d7
Stats:     241 lines in 11 files changed: 0 ins; 228 del; 13 mod

8345325: SM cleanup of GetPropertyAction in java.base

Reviewed-by: alanb, lancea, naoto, mchung

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22497

From aivanov at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 16:42:43 2024
From: aivanov at openjdk.org (Alexey Ivanov)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 16:42:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8324491: Keyboard layout did not keep it state
 if it was changed when dialog is active
In-Reply-To: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
References: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
Message-ID: <2rsx0fDpxzi9J3eL3VdbWsH3ScmmwRErdR3Hc_Bl-tg=.f0f9267e-be86-409e-abc6-6e8e19a6011c@github.com>

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:47:29 GMT, Dmitry Markov <dmarkov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> If AWT/Swing app displays several windows and an user changes the keyboard layout and then closes the focused window, the app does not keep the keyboard layout changes.
> 
> It is necessary to sync currentLocale and Windows keyboard layout values in `WInputMethod` class before component activation.

Looks good to me.

The keyboard layout is preserved after closing the dialog. I used SwingSet2 and **Show Input Dialog** to test the changes.

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

Marked as reviewed by aivanov (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22411#pullrequestreview-2476237306

From jlu at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 17:18:48 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 17:18:48 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344589: Update IANA Language Subtag Registry
 to Version 2024-11-19
In-Reply-To: <gAQGUkG03O5urb6kto7g-kg9mTz0SrDPLfJj57oky8g=.1f7918c0-7edf-43c8-bd97-4bf050d8f034@github.com>
References: <gAQGUkG03O5urb6kto7g-kg9mTz0SrDPLfJj57oky8g=.1f7918c0-7edf-43c8-bd97-4bf050d8f034@github.com>
Message-ID: <awSTBOob4UF5XKV1oiOXRGZJnDSUm0ikCwaSJOvQLFQ=.1a01488f-1e7f-4047-a7ae-d90732b4ffe1@github.com>

On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 02:59:54 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this PR which keeps the IANA language subtag registry data up to date with release _2024-11-19_.
> 
> The changes are trivial and Locale tests pass as expected.

Thanks for the reviews.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22265#issuecomment-2515142741

From jlu at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 17:18:49 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 17:18:49 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8344589: Update IANA Language Subtag
 Registry to Version 2024-11-19
In-Reply-To: <gAQGUkG03O5urb6kto7g-kg9mTz0SrDPLfJj57oky8g=.1f7918c0-7edf-43c8-bd97-4bf050d8f034@github.com>
References: <gAQGUkG03O5urb6kto7g-kg9mTz0SrDPLfJj57oky8g=.1f7918c0-7edf-43c8-bd97-4bf050d8f034@github.com>
Message-ID: <ItS2beIpOOmr_eLktBhgy8YNDsFVlr9AVk3V5Bl_2r0=.c9fefab3-633f-408a-b142-762e432884da@github.com>

On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 02:59:54 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this PR which keeps the IANA language subtag registry data up to date with release _2024-11-19_.
> 
> The changes are trivial and Locale tests pass as expected.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 9267dfa6
Author:    Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/9267dfa63b1d6b3f339782d2b720055a3da8ae6a
Stats:     13 lines in 2 files changed: 10 ins; 0 del; 3 mod

8344589: Update IANA Language Subtag Registry to Version 2024-11-19

Reviewed-by: iris, lancea, naoto

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22265

From azvegint at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 18:16:43 2024
From: azvegint at openjdk.org (Alexander Zvegintsev)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 18:16:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8324491: Keyboard layout did not keep it state
 if it was changed when dialog is active
In-Reply-To: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
References: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
Message-ID: <4_Jp5Iwmz3L2g7G2HJBqj1O_0Tqk2FrxH1qfqymcjTQ=.5d250b48-689d-4a16-80db-e6b289676655@github.com>

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:47:29 GMT, Dmitry Markov <dmarkov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> If AWT/Swing app displays several windows and an user changes the keyboard layout and then closes the focused window, the app does not keep the keyboard layout changes.
> 
> It is necessary to sync currentLocale and Windows keyboard layout values in `WInputMethod` class before component activation.

Marked as reviewed by azvegint (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22411#pullrequestreview-2476468276

From dmarkov at openjdk.org  Tue Dec  3 18:40:45 2024
From: dmarkov at openjdk.org (Dmitry Markov)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 18:40:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8324491: Keyboard layout didn't keep its
 state if it was changed when dialog was active
In-Reply-To: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
References: <b7_ivsVK_TTFJGqbCbMZSR2L5gYDsXzxVEQjodWobkk=.4b196bd3-1bf5-40e4-ac91-226f80fa6ec4@github.com>
Message-ID: <zaALUgr_i63weIuwF-uGr4iTPLO4uwgaRHdQXFJmVS8=.2a84cdb8-2ed3-43b8-88fc-726bd65a7f80@github.com>

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:47:29 GMT, Dmitry Markov <dmarkov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> If AWT/Swing app displays several windows and an user changes the keyboard layout and then closes the focused window, the app does not keep the keyboard layout changes.
> 
> It is necessary to sync currentLocale and Windows keyboard layout values in `WInputMethod` class before component activation.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 2be07b5f
Author:    Dmitry Markov <dmarkov at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/2be07b5f9d2f3f0b885feb08ff10a57824ea5748
Stats:     5 lines in 1 file changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 1 mod

8324491: Keyboard layout didn't keep its state if it was changed when dialog was active

Reviewed-by: aivanov, azvegint

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22411

From jlu at openjdk.org  Wed Dec  4 20:59:48 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 20:59:48 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8341923: java.util.Locale class specification
 improvements [v5]
In-Reply-To: <aVaVg9JVtQcvW31fOopHZYHfskHcTxpwZL23s8z54Kg=.91ca613f-78b0-4ada-920c-4f25a03b3938@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
 <aVaVg9JVtQcvW31fOopHZYHfskHcTxpwZL23s8z54Kg=.91ca613f-78b0-4ada-920c-4f25a03b3938@github.com>
Message-ID: <kXo2U8ix1cOoo36RTOZUm75yw6OHEqcbnT4bwevI9-s=.fa1d9ad8-1525-41bd-8489-49c09922be6b@github.com>

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 02:29:16 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this PR and corresponding CSR which includes a wide range of specification improvements for java.util.Locale. See the CSR for further detail. Other changes/suggestions are welcomed to be included as part of this change.
>> 
>> APIDiff: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/8341923_apidiff/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>> Javadoc: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/api/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
>
> Justin Lu has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   define 'locale-sensitive' as an index term

Thanks for the reviews!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192#issuecomment-2518543992

From jlu at openjdk.org  Wed Dec  4 20:59:48 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 20:59:48 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8341923: java.util.Locale class
 specification improvements
In-Reply-To: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
References: <a8ibOqDLUAn4-KOJtPQtD-FKDX73ZnvMI51UWLuDhPY=.f48b60d9-fe3b-401a-a952-38bbcc6cd843@github.com>
Message-ID: <9BvcEfvTGwcnaohpiFamMaWroZHD5dPjAG_zIX2C_bM=.103b92aa-0ab8-431f-9091-10c4d765d309@github.com>

On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 07:41:31 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this PR and corresponding CSR which includes a wide range of specification improvements for java.util.Locale. See the CSR for further detail. Other changes/suggestions are welcomed to be included as part of this change.
> 
> APIDiff: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/8341923_apidiff/java.base/java/util/Locale.html
> Javadoc: https://cr.openjdk.org/~jlu/api/java.base/java/util/Locale.html

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: ee0f88c9
Author:    Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/ee0f88c90155c26302425e33d3137c064e70ba6e
Stats:     327 lines in 1 file changed: 105 ins; 89 del; 133 mod

8341923: java.util.Locale class specification improvements

Reviewed-by: liach, naoto

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22192

From liach at openjdk.org  Thu Dec  5 20:44:59 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
Message-ID: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>

> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
> 
> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
> 
> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
> - Line number changes to:
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
> 
>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
> 
> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.

Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:

 - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
 - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

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

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22420&range=01
  Stats: 634 lines in 360 files changed: 2 ins; 555 del; 77 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22420/head:pull/22420

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420

From mchung at openjdk.org  Thu Dec  5 22:02:40 2024
From: mchung at openjdk.org (Mandy Chung)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 22:02:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
Message-ID: <blFJd96UzcOMH9VRX2YpVsHddN_aI95D5_hD5nC2D9U=.fbe0beea-699c-473a-a53f-268429b94926@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
>> 
>> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
>> 
>> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
>> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
>> - Line number changes to:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
>> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
>> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
>> 
>>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
>> 
>> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

The change looks okay to me except `ParameterAnnotations.java`.   This task is part of JEP 484 and test-only.   It seems good to backport to 24.

test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java line 643:

> 641: 
> 642:         Task.Result result = new JavacTask(tb)
> 643:                 .processors(new TestAP())

I assume this fix does not require this change, right?  If so, better to keep the original code and do this cleanup as a separate issue.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#pullrequestreview-2483057967
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#discussion_r1872207964

From liach at openjdk.org  Thu Dec  5 22:29:40 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 22:29:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <blFJd96UzcOMH9VRX2YpVsHddN_aI95D5_hD5nC2D9U=.fbe0beea-699c-473a-a53f-268429b94926@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
 <blFJd96UzcOMH9VRX2YpVsHddN_aI95D5_hD5nC2D9U=.fbe0beea-699c-473a-a53f-268429b94926@github.com>
Message-ID: <0UU_yVYVqg3FQpCHy7i7hQYidoMigQtXKbTJdNIUMbQ=.d46b4331-cd85-4199-bac3-9b48454e9add@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 21:54:19 GMT, Mandy Chung <mchung at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
>> 
>>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714
>
> test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java line 643:
> 
>> 641: 
>> 642:         Task.Result result = new JavacTask(tb)
>> 643:                 .processors(new TestAP())
> 
> I assume this fix does not require this change, right?  If so, better to keep the original code and do this cleanup as a separate issue.

It is required.  If we use the command line and FQN to specify a processor like in the current code without preview, this test fails with some classpath error.

> Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java

>Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.

I should attach the exact error message:


test: testInnerClass
[DIRECT]:
- compiler.err.proc.processor.not.found: ParameterAnnotations$TestAP
- compiler.err.proc.no.explicit.annotation.processing.requested: T$I
2 errors
Exception running test testInnerClass: toolbox.Task$TaskError: Task javac failed: rc=1
toolbox.Task$TaskError: Task javac failed: rc=1
        at toolbox.AbstractTask.checkExit(AbstractTask.java:154)
        at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:381)
        at toolbox.AbstractTask.run(AbstractTask.java:102)
        at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:52)
        at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:321)
        at ParameterAnnotations.doTest(ParameterAnnotations.java:650)
        at ParameterAnnotations.testInnerClass(ParameterAnnotations.java:151)
        at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:104)
        at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:565)
        at toolbox.TestRunner.runTests(TestRunner.java:91)
        at ParameterAnnotations.runTests(ParameterAnnotations.java:82)
        at ParameterAnnotations.main(ParameterAnnotations.java:73)
        at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:104)
        at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:565)
        at com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.MainActionHelper$AgentVMRunnable.run(MainActionHelper.java:333)
        at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:1447)


Same for all 5 tests in this file.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#discussion_r1872240998

From liach at openjdk.org  Thu Dec  5 22:39:38 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 22:39:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <0UU_yVYVqg3FQpCHy7i7hQYidoMigQtXKbTJdNIUMbQ=.d46b4331-cd85-4199-bac3-9b48454e9add@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
 <blFJd96UzcOMH9VRX2YpVsHddN_aI95D5_hD5nC2D9U=.fbe0beea-699c-473a-a53f-268429b94926@github.com>
 <0UU_yVYVqg3FQpCHy7i7hQYidoMigQtXKbTJdNIUMbQ=.d46b4331-cd85-4199-bac3-9b48454e9add@github.com>
Message-ID: <YGI23OMLvPmZm9gfhhWUYJBV33J8XNfmEgNxr_BqDNc=.b0bb0f88-7494-433e-81f7-bddfc90039aa@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 22:26:31 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java line 643:
>> 
>>> 641: 
>>> 642:         Task.Result result = new JavacTask(tb)
>>> 643:                 .processors(new TestAP())
>> 
>> I assume this fix does not require this change, right?  If so, better to keep the original code and do this cleanup as a separate issue.
>
> It is required.  If we use the command line and FQN to specify a processor like in the current code without preview, this test fails with some classpath error.
> 
>> Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
> 
>>Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
> 
> I should attach the exact error message:
> 
> 
> test: testInnerClass
> [DIRECT]:
> - compiler.err.proc.processor.not.found: ParameterAnnotations$TestAP
> - compiler.err.proc.no.explicit.annotation.processing.requested: T$I
> 2 errors
> Exception running test testInnerClass: toolbox.Task$TaskError: Task javac failed: rc=1
> toolbox.Task$TaskError: Task javac failed: rc=1
>         at toolbox.AbstractTask.checkExit(AbstractTask.java:154)
>         at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:381)
>         at toolbox.AbstractTask.run(AbstractTask.java:102)
>         at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:52)
>         at toolbox.JavacTask.run(JavacTask.java:321)
>         at ParameterAnnotations.doTest(ParameterAnnotations.java:650)
>         at ParameterAnnotations.testInnerClass(ParameterAnnotations.java:151)
>         at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:104)
>         at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:565)
>         at toolbox.TestRunner.runTests(TestRunner.java:91)
>         at ParameterAnnotations.runTests(ParameterAnnotations.java:82)
>         at ParameterAnnotations.main(ParameterAnnotations.java:73)
>         at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:104)
>         at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:565)
>         at com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.MainActionHelper$AgentVMRunnable.run(MainActionHelper.java:333)
>         at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:1447)
> 
> 
> Same for all 5 tests in this file.

Filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345622. There is no similar issues that happen as a conjunction of preview and annotation processing.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#discussion_r1872252558

From mchung at openjdk.org  Thu Dec  5 23:04:40 2024
From: mchung at openjdk.org (Mandy Chung)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 23:04:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
Message-ID: <maLFwsbZ7sM2p1lT95sryUOcy-Np0ltOALkqtOi2V14=.50a73592-c116-467e-8b01-de69d690acc4@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
>> 
>> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
>> 
>> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
>> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
>> - Line number changes to:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
>> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
>> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
>> 
>>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
>> 
>> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

Thanks for filing the issue to follow up.

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

Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#pullrequestreview-2483183112

From asotona at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 07:01:45 2024
From: asotona at openjdk.org (Adam Sotona)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 07:01:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
Message-ID: <cYKI7KfuddHlzINClbgrqWQuLJPTw5rYBUurMV61Gbg=.a84e6ec5-b489-44be-ad12-65bbb954aab8@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
>> 
>> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
>> 
>> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
>> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
>> - Line number changes to:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
>> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
>> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
>> 
>>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
>> 
>> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

Looks good to me, thanks.

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

Marked as reviewed by asotona (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#pullrequestreview-2483795644

From liach at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 14:27:45 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 14:27:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
Message-ID: <NFMYqK-YAR0M4ogdKPBJCDErb0InxSmKB1-4xAwM4m4=.b208051b-f553-41e3-b365-6fe0b48f4e68@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
>> 
>> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
>> 
>> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
>> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
>> - Line number changes to:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
>> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
>> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
>> 
>>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
>> 
>> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

Thanks for the reviews!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#issuecomment-2523362333

From liach at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 14:27:46 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 14:27:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714
In-Reply-To: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
Message-ID: <lC5dc_Tdirtuqzeo_Owzx7FAERGLPn3zxVToCnmFrVc=.37555c56-eae5-4674-812f-cf8c4c666c16@github.com>

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:10:15 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
> 
> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
> 
> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
> - Line number changes to:
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
> 
>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
> 
> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 49664195
Author:    Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900
Stats:     634 lines in 360 files changed: 2 ins; 555 del; 77 mod

8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-8334714

Reviewed-by: mchung, asotona

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420

From liach at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 15:08:47 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 15:08:47 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from
 tests after JDK-8334714 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
References: <3FonQjV3pn1bynQC4dT-Mo2ttwRkmxuAkY0y9TbB0u8=.5ea6d9ce-068b-4d1d-81e1-548f59761641@github.com>
 <K1wkrQxNtVranKTRTU1gbdxQ9u9VpJhYBHwr1c6HlTI=.4244232a-7468-4b26-a888-7adee835f325@github.com>
Message-ID: <UbEObYZrmrSyDOgIKSYDiGuI4DJ5xs-oooevsmtRw3Q=.e2fbe36e-0d43-4ab1-9044-2a203019ffaa@github.com>

On Thu, 5 Dec 2024 20:44:59 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove the redundant `@enablePreview` and `--enable-preview` flags for enabling ClassFile API in the tests.  The remainder of these flags in all tests seem to serve preview APIs (such as ScopedValue) or language features (primitive pattern, module imports, etc.), or testing the enable preview flag itself.  Now there is fewer than 100 `@enablePreview` in the `test` directory.
>> 
>> To reviewers, there are some redundant changes and notes:
>> 
>> - There's one security test that used `ModuleInfoWriter` that depends on ClassFile API.
>> - Removed unnecessary exports of `jdk.internal.classfile.impl`. Remaining uses are:
>>   - `BoundAttribute::payloadLen` for javac attribute tests
>>   - Annotation reading/writing for javac annotation tests
>> - Line number changes to:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NestedLineNumberTest.java
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/linenumbers/NullCheckLineNumberTest.java
>> - Move from legacy jdk.internal.classfile to java.lang.classfile in:
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/NoStringToLower.java and 
>>   - test/langtools/tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java
>> - Weird annotation processor behavior in test/langtools/tools/javac/annotations/parameter/ParameterAnnotations.java
>> 
>>   - Without preview and using explicit file name, the javac task fails; using the builder live AP object works both with and without preview.
>> 
>> Testing: tier 1-5.  Please inform me if any of these tests belong to higher tiers.
>
> Chen Liang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/openjdk/jdk into cleanup/cf-preview
>  - 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-83324714

>From internal discussion, this task is logically associated with the finalization of ClassFile API and is best done for the same release 24.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22420#issuecomment-2523450991

From liach at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 15:17:26 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 15:17:26 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview
 from tests after JDK-8334714
Message-ID: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>

Hi all,

This pull request contains a backport of commit [49664195](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.

This is a test-only change so it is eligible for backport; in addition, this change is logically part of the Class-File API finalized in JDK 24.

The commit being backported was authored by Chen Liang on 6 Dec 2024 and was reviewed by Mandy Chung and Adam Sotona.

Thanks!

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

Commit messages:
 - Backport 496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22607&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8334733
  Stats: 634 lines in 360 files changed: 2 ins; 555 del; 77 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22607/head:pull/22607

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607

From duke at openjdk.org  Fri Dec  6 21:40:55 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (duke)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 21:40:55 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Withdrawn: 8195686: ISO-8859-8-i charset cannot be
 decoded, should be mapped to ISO-8859-8
In-Reply-To: <kZr_o-N_jfT0QV8IP49dgVcJDaQyOfXI-2jHmQln0mU=.4b7a086e-b4a8-4089-859b-2e8599fd3fd8@github.com>
References: <kZr_o-N_jfT0QV8IP49dgVcJDaQyOfXI-2jHmQln0mU=.4b7a086e-b4a8-4089-859b-2e8599fd3fd8@github.com>
Message-ID: <DAVnmGCsxxmr-_WoYElRJFAcBuyMuOPzK1Ni-9yjogA=.4ef2a254-c1e8-4bc1-a95f-156db925e592@github.com>

On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 10:38:38 GMT, Pratiksha.Sawant <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Mapping ISO-8859-8-I charset to ISO-8859-8.
> Below mentioned 2 aliases are added as part of this:-
> **ISO-8859-8-I**
> **ISO8859-8-I**
> 
> The bug report for the same:- https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8195686

This pull request has been closed without being integrated.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20690

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Sat Dec  7 19:48:49 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 19:48:49 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344252: SM cleanup in java.util classes [v3]
In-Reply-To: <4MWPGqjfxblaSlsMPqS9V49dZxHfUckyAdopHxdpXFc=.3ba4f181-e96f-4228-afc9-ec2221a2fc45@github.com>
References: <qNhTDnRy7n4KURBP8p5dGB7ugAtoNBJwtxyFBM2LkDA=.d9259c4d-10b3-4fa0-a624-a34b01640589@github.com>
 <4MWPGqjfxblaSlsMPqS9V49dZxHfUckyAdopHxdpXFc=.3ba4f181-e96f-4228-afc9-ec2221a2fc45@github.com>
Message-ID: <29G6N7CbeIyNfvUMTOYWf4g1WVPTN1JhvDdj_mZ614I=.f85cdf01-22f9-4a60-aa18-eb7d7fb4c2dc@github.com>

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 17:52:28 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Remove use of doPrivileged and SecurityManager in java.util.
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Correct @see link syntax in AbstractResourceBundleProvider

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/ResourceBundle.java line 3657:

> 3655:     }
> 3656: 
> 3657:     private static final boolean TRACE_ON = Boolean.getBoolean(

This update seems to have broken the tracing feature of ResourceBundle.

The previous code called `GetPropertyAction::privilegedGetProperty` to get the system property "resource.bundle.debug" with a default of "false".  It then used `Boolean::parseBoolean` to compare it to "true", ignoring case.

The new code  uses `System::getProperty` to get the same property, then calls `Boolean::getBoolean` which calls `System::getProperty` to get the value of the property which name is either "false" or the result of looking up "resource.bundle.debug"

>From what I can tell, it is now not possible to enable tracing.

Seems like we could simply use `Boolean.getBoolean("resource.bundle.debug")` instead?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22122#discussion_r1874554294

From alanb at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 08:01:45 2024
From: alanb at openjdk.org (Alan Bateman)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 08:01:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344252: SM cleanup in java.util classes [v3]
In-Reply-To: <29G6N7CbeIyNfvUMTOYWf4g1WVPTN1JhvDdj_mZ614I=.f85cdf01-22f9-4a60-aa18-eb7d7fb4c2dc@github.com>
References: <qNhTDnRy7n4KURBP8p5dGB7ugAtoNBJwtxyFBM2LkDA=.d9259c4d-10b3-4fa0-a624-a34b01640589@github.com>
 <4MWPGqjfxblaSlsMPqS9V49dZxHfUckyAdopHxdpXFc=.3ba4f181-e96f-4228-afc9-ec2221a2fc45@github.com>
 <29G6N7CbeIyNfvUMTOYWf4g1WVPTN1JhvDdj_mZ614I=.f85cdf01-22f9-4a60-aa18-eb7d7fb4c2dc@github.com>
Message-ID: <xZBmZJ-LfIwxkPVO5B0RoZHIw3USQCkoRYNCFF6ylis=.7b48249e-51d8-4135-9205-472df6096da3@github.com>

On Sat, 7 Dec 2024 19:44:05 GMT, Eirik Bj?rsn?s <eirbjo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Seems like we could simply use `Boolean.getBoolean("resource.bundle.debug")` instead?

Naoto may know the history on this property. It may have been introduced for debugging when working on the RB implementation or maybe it was introduced to allow developers to debug, not sure. If the latter then it's important to preserve long standing behavior. If the former, and it was never documented, there is a lot more flexibility to change.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22122#discussion_r1875526278

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 09:02:47 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 09:02:47 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344252: SM cleanup in java.util classes [v3]
In-Reply-To: <xZBmZJ-LfIwxkPVO5B0RoZHIw3USQCkoRYNCFF6ylis=.7b48249e-51d8-4135-9205-472df6096da3@github.com>
References: <qNhTDnRy7n4KURBP8p5dGB7ugAtoNBJwtxyFBM2LkDA=.d9259c4d-10b3-4fa0-a624-a34b01640589@github.com>
 <4MWPGqjfxblaSlsMPqS9V49dZxHfUckyAdopHxdpXFc=.3ba4f181-e96f-4228-afc9-ec2221a2fc45@github.com>
 <29G6N7CbeIyNfvUMTOYWf4g1WVPTN1JhvDdj_mZ614I=.f85cdf01-22f9-4a60-aa18-eb7d7fb4c2dc@github.com>
 <xZBmZJ-LfIwxkPVO5B0RoZHIw3USQCkoRYNCFF6ylis=.7b48249e-51d8-4135-9205-472df6096da3@github.com>
Message-ID: <z6wjI3DPp3Ivh8iVV4jplIHoYOQ9RjM4YNxaSZeRSzw=.1f24c46a-27e1-4040-98fa-5c669ce68f5d@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 07:58:35 GMT, Alan Bateman <alanb at openjdk.org> wrote:

> If the former, and it was never documented, there is a lot more flexibility to change.

Fair enough. However, this SM change seems to accidentally have introduced a bug where the system property is read twice, first calling System.getProperty to look up the name of the system property which is then looked up by  Boolean.getBoolean. That behavior just seems broken. 

@RogerRiggs may have intended to use `Boolean::parseBoolean` instead:

`Boolean.parseBoolean(System.getProperty("resource.bundle.debug", "false"))`

which is equivalent to:

`Boolean.getBoolean("resource.bundle.debug")`

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22122#discussion_r1875603019

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 12:22:25 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:22:25 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed
Message-ID: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>

Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 

I have located these modified files using:

git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list

and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.

I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

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

Commit messages:
 - 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for client-libs in files where it was missed

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22638&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345797
  Stats: 326 lines in 344 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 326 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22638/head:pull/22638

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 12:34:53 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:34:53 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed
Message-ID: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>

Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 

I have located these modified files using:

git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list

and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.

I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

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

Commit messages:
 - 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for core-libs in files where it was missed

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22640&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345799
  Stats: 432 lines in 436 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 432 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22640/head:pull/22640

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 12:37:37 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:37:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
Message-ID: <pvg0zmOLP5jqotNGmJpPQiTwlebymGDXknOVae7-JV0=.33511e8a-8493-40b9-9323-21a2eacc00b7@github.com>

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Add more client files

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638/files/49387718..e196d3f6

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22638&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22638&range=00-01

  Stats: 16 lines in 17 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 16 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22638/head:pull/22638

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 13:03:06 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:03:06 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
Message-ID: <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Add more core-libs files

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640/files/e7cfe0f7..8e040c3a

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22640&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22640&range=00-01

  Stats: 9 lines in 9 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 9 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22640/head:pull/22640

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640

From dfuchs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 13:30:43 2024
From: dfuchs at openjdk.org (Daniel Fuchs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:30:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
Message-ID: <vn5KixoVXSgvE9fcU5Pcd-y9NkYlVz86c8VG-g_P6OM=.3a4a66f2-9b24-49f8-9459-628ab9c8b229@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Add more core-libs files

changes to sun.net and java.naming/jdk.naming.* look ok

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2527957595

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 14:02:39 2024
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 14:02:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
Message-ID: <CZvJVQu03QkOiUM5mcdagcdfDvo6SMRhg-OVi9-O9RY=.a676e608-9fbf-4224-a417-2b1e063275af@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Add more core-libs files

Looks good.
They all seem to follow the pattern, I looked at some and yes they have changes in 2024 but no year update.  One of them was mine I noticed!

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

Marked as reviewed by kevinw (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2488883450

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 15:19:38 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:19:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
Message-ID: <prU8FGqD7_3uykFpnLnsDUN5E6Wnd44EUJ3Z0h3WkNU=.c76b3ad2-1997-4dfe-8d46-9392410c99cb@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Add more core-libs files

Copyright dates in third party files are not updated uniformly. See the previous comment.

That git query isn't correct for all the files in the repo. In particular, the copyrights on third party files are NOT updated uniformly when new versions are applied. In particular, XML files are NOT updated.

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

Changes requested by rriggs (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2489132284
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2528303669

From kevinw at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 15:28:38 2024
From: kevinw at openjdk.org (Kevin Walls)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:28:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
Message-ID: <A1yQwWAFdf-orxwIzsYw-jG7xfJ16K_Ntxn_Oy-LN64=.9875868c-1441-4111-b031-dbfc99cda00e@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 13:03:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Add more core-libs files

I also meant to note that there are updates to binaries, src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/icu/impl/data/icudt76b/... which maybe isn't intentional, or I just don't understand?

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2528357715

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 15:42:57 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <A1yQwWAFdf-orxwIzsYw-jG7xfJ16K_Ntxn_Oy-LN64=.9875868c-1441-4111-b031-dbfc99cda00e@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
 <A1yQwWAFdf-orxwIzsYw-jG7xfJ16K_Ntxn_Oy-LN64=.9875868c-1441-4111-b031-dbfc99cda00e@github.com>
Message-ID: <QLNzClECNTKmLMG1OzFKoY6S9ZscAfwfF0BhnfJ6_PE=.6c75b36a-0b08-4c14-93b8-553deeb0dd48@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:26:00 GMT, Kevin Walls <kevinw at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I also meant to note that there are updates to binaries, src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/icu/impl/data/icudt76b/... which maybe isn't intentional, or I just don't understand?

That was certainly not intentional! I'm not sure how that happened, I need to look at my copyright update script again...

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2528425161

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 15:42:57 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
Message-ID: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Revert changes to binary files

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640/files/8e040c3a..c8d541f9

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22640&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22640&range=01-02

  Stats: 0 lines in 4 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22640/head:pull/22640

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 15:48:38 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:48:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <prU8FGqD7_3uykFpnLnsDUN5E6Wnd44EUJ3Z0h3WkNU=.c76b3ad2-1997-4dfe-8d46-9392410c99cb@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
 <prU8FGqD7_3uykFpnLnsDUN5E6Wnd44EUJ3Z0h3WkNU=.c76b3ad2-1997-4dfe-8d46-9392410c99cb@github.com>
Message-ID: <qXxWJxbNRvYCt4hfOj3NWzihP8_7DFZqwhryKvT1xCw=.6d661efe-ffcd-4b83-9559-e54a2a9a09d4@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:16:10 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> That git query isn't correct for all the files in the repo. In particular, the copyrights on third party files are NOT updated uniformly when new versions are applied. In particular, XML files are NOT updated.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you saying that I did not update files that should have been updated, or that I updated files that should not have been updated?

The only 3rd party XML files I know about are the ones in `make/data/cldr`. They have certainly been updated in 2024 from upstream, but they do not carry an Oracle copyright header, so there is nothing there to update.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2528451279

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 16:06:46 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 16:06:46 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344252: SM cleanup in java.util classes [v3]
In-Reply-To: <z6wjI3DPp3Ivh8iVV4jplIHoYOQ9RjM4YNxaSZeRSzw=.1f24c46a-27e1-4040-98fa-5c669ce68f5d@github.com>
References: <qNhTDnRy7n4KURBP8p5dGB7ugAtoNBJwtxyFBM2LkDA=.d9259c4d-10b3-4fa0-a624-a34b01640589@github.com>
 <4MWPGqjfxblaSlsMPqS9V49dZxHfUckyAdopHxdpXFc=.3ba4f181-e96f-4228-afc9-ec2221a2fc45@github.com>
 <29G6N7CbeIyNfvUMTOYWf4g1WVPTN1JhvDdj_mZ614I=.f85cdf01-22f9-4a60-aa18-eb7d7fb4c2dc@github.com>
 <xZBmZJ-LfIwxkPVO5B0RoZHIw3USQCkoRYNCFF6ylis=.7b48249e-51d8-4135-9205-472df6096da3@github.com>
 <z6wjI3DPp3Ivh8iVV4jplIHoYOQ9RjM4YNxaSZeRSzw=.1f24c46a-27e1-4040-98fa-5c669ce68f5d@github.com>
Message-ID: <2kTf09uckfME3hGDnGELXhdx4B5Gj5OvnfyDpqT0fG0=.80cd52a7-f2c8-46db-aae8-8cce74f9bcf0@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 08:58:19 GMT, Eirik Bj?rsn?s <eirbjo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> Seems like we could simply use `Boolean.getBoolean("resource.bundle.debug")` instead?
>> 
>> Naoto may know the history on this property. It may have been introduced for debugging when working on the RB implementation or maybe it was introduced to allow developers to debug, not sure. If the latter then it's important to preserve long standing behavior. If the former, and it was never documented, there is a lot more flexibility to change.
>
>> If the former, and it was never documented, there is a lot more flexibility to change.
> 
> Fair enough. However, this SM change seems to accidentally have introduced a bug where the system property is read twice, first calling System.getProperty to look up the name of the system property which is then looked up by  Boolean.getBoolean. That behavior just seems broken. 
> 
> @RogerRiggs may have intended to use `Boolean::parseBoolean` instead:
> 
> `Boolean.parseBoolean(System.getProperty("resource.bundle.debug", "false"))`
> 
> which is equivalent to:
> 
> `Boolean.getBoolean("resource.bundle.debug")`

Filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345818.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22122#discussion_r1876255089

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 17:26:49 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 17:26:49 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System
 property resource.bundle debug
Message-ID: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>

Replace broken getProperty with Boolean.getBoolean.

Manual testing confirms trace messages are enabled with `-Dresource.bundle.debug=true`

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

Commit messages:
 - 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System property resource.bundle.debug

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22649&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345818
  Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22649/head:pull/22649

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649

From joehw at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 17:44:40 2024
From: joehw at openjdk.org (Joe Wang)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 17:44:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <mu_rEJuYYxO7juUhV0qSjwkgt7XFhpnwddzS_bRgYcU=.fcc039a4-77c9-445a-9874-b934abeaefeb@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

The git query found all those java.xml properties files likely due to the jcheck change (JDK-8325558) you made. That patch correctly kept the copyright years as they were since we generally don't change copyright year unless the change is significant.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2528864312

From mchung at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 18:01:37 2024
From: mchung at openjdk.org (Mandy Chung)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 18:01:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview
 from tests after JDK-8334714
In-Reply-To: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
References: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
Message-ID: <SReh6u2czEgXid48w9XheeErSgeSc3O2_NKZFcl3nCc=.7c7f1e0e-cc65-4344-900d-e6e2fde25358@github.com>

On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 15:11:20 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> This pull request contains a backport of commit [49664195](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
> 
> This is a test-only change so it is eligible for backport; in addition, this change is logically part of the Class-File API finalized in JDK 24.
> 
> The commit being backported was authored by Chen Liang on 6 Dec 2024 and was reviewed by Mandy Chung and Adam Sotona.
> 
> Thanks!

Marked as reviewed by mchung (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607#pullrequestreview-2489586744

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 18:15:43 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 18:15:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <pvg0zmOLP5jqotNGmJpPQiTwlebymGDXknOVae7-JV0=.33511e8a-8493-40b9-9323-21a2eacc00b7@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pvg0zmOLP5jqotNGmJpPQiTwlebymGDXknOVae7-JV0=.33511e8a-8493-40b9-9323-21a2eacc00b7@github.com>
Message-ID: <-CBeobDgFBPLaO0HJADt-SzXLUbrgCDhklHTiElA2RY=.7ec7eede-d6aa-4189-b6f1-5b23250a7512@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:37:37 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Add more client files

There's an image (JPG) file in this list ! Why ?

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#issuecomment-2528980141

From liach at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 18:37:42 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 18:37:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview
 from tests after JDK-8334714
In-Reply-To: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
References: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
Message-ID: <-vHUTV6ABJZEaxVGeZ2FytzgMEIx-Cdcgm_I5TIuxo4=.5f76bd21-9378-4e52-949b-06ad59192bab@github.com>

On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 15:11:20 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> This pull request contains a backport of commit [49664195](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
> 
> This is a test-only change so it is eligible for backport; in addition, this change is logically part of the Class-File API finalized in JDK 24.
> 
> The commit being backported was authored by Chen Liang on 6 Dec 2024 and was reviewed by Mandy Chung and Adam Sotona.
> 
> Thanks!

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607#issuecomment-2529047739

From liach at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 18:37:43 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 18:37:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] Integrated: 8334733: Remove obsolete
 @enablePreview from tests after JDK-8334714
In-Reply-To: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
References: <nIq__4-5O-FUhciTk3r1NgxDQjdDmF6xib3MKvB2CBY=.b88642c6-9389-4c9a-957a-cec148435a6c@github.com>
Message-ID: <pKY85AZzy2hqc6ksUGd7oUO5wOaRP9FPj4dS5pha6k4=.f8a0d57a-a0c4-46cc-994e-844867b88e09@github.com>

On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 15:11:20 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> This pull request contains a backport of commit [49664195](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900) from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
> 
> This is a test-only change so it is eligible for backport; in addition, this change is logically part of the Class-File API finalized in JDK 24.
> 
> The commit being backported was authored by Chen Liang on 6 Dec 2024 and was reviewed by Mandy Chung and Adam Sotona.
> 
> Thanks!

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: a8132543
Author:    Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/a81325433d7da6b73abb37ea3e33489d0a3afbae
Stats:     634 lines in 360 files changed: 2 ins; 555 del; 77 mod

8334733: Remove obsolete @enablePreview from tests after JDK-8334714

Reviewed-by: mchung
Backport-of: 496641955041c5e48359e6256a4a61812653d900

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22607

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:04:44 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:04:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <-CBeobDgFBPLaO0HJADt-SzXLUbrgCDhklHTiElA2RY=.7ec7eede-d6aa-4189-b6f1-5b23250a7512@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pvg0zmOLP5jqotNGmJpPQiTwlebymGDXknOVae7-JV0=.33511e8a-8493-40b9-9323-21a2eacc00b7@github.com>
 <-CBeobDgFBPLaO0HJADt-SzXLUbrgCDhklHTiElA2RY=.7ec7eede-d6aa-4189-b6f1-5b23250a7512@github.com>
Message-ID: <08brSTaz5WLn_Hv1i0feMAZUYn-GnboDXiKPBZh_VIg=.25d76d8b-3c31-45c1-bfeb-39e5b2ad641d@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 18:13:25 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

> There's an image (JPG) file in this list ! Why ?

That is indeed a very good question. I got a few other modified binary files as well; I can't say why. I am basically doing a sed for `Copyright (c) ... Oracle`, and I have double-checked that there are no such strings in that file.

... ohhh... I think I get it, sed might have mistaken CRLF as line endings and converted it to pure LF.

I'll revert it anyway. Thanks for spotting.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#issuecomment-2529120261

From ihse at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:11:05 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:11:05 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
Message-ID: <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Revert mistakenly modified binary files

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638/files/e196d3f6..973f9573

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22638&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22638&range=01-02

  Stats: 0 lines in 19 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22638/head:pull/22638

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638

From acobbs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:18:56 2024
From: acobbs at openjdk.org (Archie Cobbs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:18:56 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8343478: Remove unnecessary @SuppressWarnings
 annotations (core-libs) [v8]
In-Reply-To: <9ZqHljyJeMr8fPG4-iU6bfQT9hQxTAwrGCl4xsQn3LA=.0b01f899-d849-4e23-8d50-8f186aade664@github.com>
References: <9ZqHljyJeMr8fPG4-iU6bfQT9hQxTAwrGCl4xsQn3LA=.0b01f899-d849-4e23-8d50-8f186aade664@github.com>
Message-ID: <NdcN2a6fhP929YpbPClZ5QfaZDJmjTn3ec-eN14aV_Y=.dfc15018-d90d-4bc3-a91f-b2e51398986f@github.com>

> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings` annotations.

Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:

 - Remove more unnecessary suppressions.
 - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
 - Remove more unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotations.
 - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
 - Remove more unnecessary warning suppressions.
 - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
 - Put back @SuppressWarnings annotations to be fixed by JDK-8343286.
 - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
 - Update copyright years.
 - Remove a few more @SuppressWarnings annotations.
 - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/cc628a13...ee2862e5

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

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21852/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=21852&range=07
  Stats: 194 lines in 99 files changed: 0 ins; 106 del; 88 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21852.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/21852/head:pull/21852

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21852

From lancea at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:32:39 2024
From: lancea at openjdk.org (Lance Andersen)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:32:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System
 property resource.bundle debug
In-Reply-To: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
References: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
Message-ID: <LYiRC4-iqh43RnYSVkDRq-JqbUBAuzbbkYc6ULLAZHo=.7c8f6eea-266d-49f2-94ac-820504052248@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 17:22:14 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Replace broken getProperty with Boolean.getBoolean.
> 
> Manual testing confirms trace messages are enabled with `-Dresource.bundle.debug=true`

Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649#pullrequestreview-2489791907

From eirbjo at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:38:38 2024
From: eirbjo at openjdk.org (Eirik =?UTF-8?B?QmrDuHJzbsO4cw==?=)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:38:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System
 property resource.bundle debug
In-Reply-To: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
References: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
Message-ID: <UeGdQTmLshFP0wG1cFHGNG7NANWSWpSQVwOy9iRICpU=.4c079241-1e4d-4405-ae78-b753d2f9f82f@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 17:22:14 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Replace broken getProperty with Boolean.getBoolean.
> 
> Manual testing confirms trace messages are enabled with `-Dresource.bundle.debug=true`

Marked as reviewed by eirbjo (Committer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649#pullrequestreview-2489826019

From joehw at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 19:53:38 2024
From: joehw at openjdk.org (Joe Wang)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:53:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <xsjhXJx2YAuLVr-ryIB6HgQo5pFQbbT5gwORtR-PwrI=.fc98b8c8-a0a7-4bd4-ab1e-1e42eed6b17f@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

Marked as reviewed by joehw (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2489899005

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 21:11:40 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 21:11:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v2]
In-Reply-To: <qXxWJxbNRvYCt4hfOj3NWzihP8_7DFZqwhryKvT1xCw=.6d661efe-ffcd-4b83-9559-e54a2a9a09d4@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <n_5G8dPJtj8IFqAZ_i15ly02uy9OxQP9o3dt5LRz4Ek=.e1f67354-ae69-473c-b3b2-3d67b459598d@github.com>
 <prU8FGqD7_3uykFpnLnsDUN5E6Wnd44EUJ3Z0h3WkNU=.c76b3ad2-1997-4dfe-8d46-9392410c99cb@github.com>
 <qXxWJxbNRvYCt4hfOj3NWzihP8_7DFZqwhryKvT1xCw=.6d661efe-ffcd-4b83-9559-e54a2a9a09d4@github.com>
Message-ID: <mDL9FucpxYnDugHN7ibpYO5qP5o1qwhidL0fzZiTuog=.b93210c4-6fed-4f1b-9f4f-46b2673e41bd@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:45:42 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> That git query isn't correct for all the files in the repo. In particular, the copyrights on third party files are NOT updated uniformly when new versions are applied. In particular, XML files are NOT updated.
>
>> That git query isn't correct for all the files in the repo. In particular, the copyrights on third party files are NOT updated uniformly when new versions are applied. In particular, XML files are NOT updated.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Are you saying that I did not update files that should have been updated, or that I updated files that should not have been updated?
> 
> The only 3rd party XML files I know about are the ones in `make/data/cldr`. They have certainly been updated in 2024 from upstream, but they do not carry an Oracle copyright header, so there is nothing there to update.

@magicus My question was about third party (xml) code used from Apache.
Joe's review and approval resolved that question.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2529462025

From darcy at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 22:20:40 2024
From: darcy at openjdk.org (Joe Darcy)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 22:20:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8343478: Remove unnecessary @SuppressWarnings
 annotations (core-libs) [v8]
In-Reply-To: <NdcN2a6fhP929YpbPClZ5QfaZDJmjTn3ec-eN14aV_Y=.dfc15018-d90d-4bc3-a91f-b2e51398986f@github.com>
References: <9ZqHljyJeMr8fPG4-iU6bfQT9hQxTAwrGCl4xsQn3LA=.0b01f899-d849-4e23-8d50-8f186aade664@github.com>
 <NdcN2a6fhP929YpbPClZ5QfaZDJmjTn3ec-eN14aV_Y=.dfc15018-d90d-4bc3-a91f-b2e51398986f@github.com>
Message-ID: <1A--E365t_-y1kXsWKb_wotAzGiVatMGWyqjdaLkTK8=.72f824e4-07ae-4e5f-b8cc-713280df230d@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:18:56 GMT, Archie Cobbs <acobbs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this patch which removes unnecessary `@SuppressWarnings` annotations.
>
> Archie Cobbs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 15 commits:
> 
>  - Remove more unnecessary suppressions.
>  - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
>  - Remove more unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotations.
>  - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
>  - Remove more unnecessary warning suppressions.
>  - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
>  - Put back @SuppressWarnings annotations to be fixed by JDK-8343286.
>  - Merge branch 'master' into SuppressWarningsCleanup-core-libs
>  - Update copyright years.
>  - Remove a few more @SuppressWarnings annotations.
>  - ... and 5 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/cc628a13...ee2862e5

Core reflection changes look fine; thanks for the cleanup @archiecobbs .

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

Marked as reviewed by darcy (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21852#pullrequestreview-2490237853

From jlu at openjdk.org  Mon Dec  9 23:01:39 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2024 23:01:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <GWjrBdyLJQ9FzJkSm8a68fiVZAVcVljFdJPmdRLTdrc=.3ef6fd4d-ead7-473f-8cf4-98f918711888@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

Looked at the i18n changes (src, test, and 3rd party icu files w/ Oracle header) and they look correct to me.

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

Marked as reviewed by jlu (Committer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2490302089

From psadhukhan at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 02:52:43 2024
From: psadhukhan at openjdk.org (Prasanta Sadhukhan)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 02:52:43 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
Message-ID: <vSnvjSdprHzVcuG8nswBFsjg-06601lKTGRfHD_311M=.f0ef7e56-a3cd-4029-9420-10058bcebfc4@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:11:05 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert mistakenly modified binary files

src/jdk.accessibility/windows/man/jabswitch.md line 3:

> 1: ---
> 2: # Copyright (c) 2019, 2024, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
> 3: # DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.

I guess this was committed 3 weeks ago, so shouldn't it be just 2024?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#discussion_r1877170365

From ihse at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 08:50:41 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:50:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <vSnvjSdprHzVcuG8nswBFsjg-06601lKTGRfHD_311M=.f0ef7e56-a3cd-4029-9420-10058bcebfc4@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
 <vSnvjSdprHzVcuG8nswBFsjg-06601lKTGRfHD_311M=.f0ef7e56-a3cd-4029-9420-10058bcebfc4@github.com>
Message-ID: <vTs2AbV0r9SH6qQcpQM5jmOYm4HEPnuc6AIwY0XtA5I=.56b7e20c-6dc6-44ab-a8a2-86b686f445ef@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 02:50:18 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan <psadhukhan at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Revert mistakenly modified binary files
>
> src/jdk.accessibility/windows/man/jabswitch.md line 3:
> 
>> 1: ---
>> 2: # Copyright (c) 2019, 2024, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
>> 3: # DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
> 
> I guess this was committed 3 weeks ago, so shouldn't it be just 2024?

The file existed before, but in the Oracle-only closed repo.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#discussion_r1877608909

From psadhukhan at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 09:04:39 2024
From: psadhukhan at openjdk.org (Prasanta Sadhukhan)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:04:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
Message-ID: <Ow6LV8TRB9Lzk-YQwzHr9tkr4OsmAEIhLj9ok3ChPfE=.5a9f3996-570d-4e28-84ae-6fe1eadb2a0a@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 19:11:05 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert mistakenly modified binary files

Marked as reviewed by psadhukhan (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#pullrequestreview-2491516974

From psadhukhan at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 09:04:41 2024
From: psadhukhan at openjdk.org (Prasanta Sadhukhan)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:04:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <vTs2AbV0r9SH6qQcpQM5jmOYm4HEPnuc6AIwY0XtA5I=.56b7e20c-6dc6-44ab-a8a2-86b686f445ef@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
 <pbFnQYaX7S8W11Hl5apt5YWS200aeyl-EpSdCh7I9uo=.2108f889-4fd7-4341-baff-d185545be548@github.com>
 <vSnvjSdprHzVcuG8nswBFsjg-06601lKTGRfHD_311M=.f0ef7e56-a3cd-4029-9420-10058bcebfc4@github.com>
 <vTs2AbV0r9SH6qQcpQM5jmOYm4HEPnuc6AIwY0XtA5I=.56b7e20c-6dc6-44ab-a8a2-86b686f445ef@github.com>
Message-ID: <-6Df1pwq9YbsxOYNxM_JJtLxLiU-j0yKeinp4gBDVbI=.bedd6e2a-a7f0-4de2-ab48-1ea46e168e66@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:47:50 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/jdk.accessibility/windows/man/jabswitch.md line 3:
>> 
>>> 1: ---
>>> 2: # Copyright (c) 2019, 2024, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
>>> 3: # DO NOT ALTER OR REMOVE COPYRIGHT NOTICES OR THIS FILE HEADER.
>> 
>> I guess this was committed 3 weeks ago, so shouldn't it be just 2024?
>
> The file existed before, but in the Oracle-only closed repo.

ok..LGTM

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638#discussion_r1877641673

From psadhukhan at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 09:33:39 2024
From: psadhukhan at openjdk.org (Prasanta Sadhukhan)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:33:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <0IesHKVS6gy8WPLSFCevvtbtchywwafjo_iChBhuvds=.b02be63c-a28f-47a8-80d3-8293993d9c15@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

not sure why client label is added, no java.desktop/accessibility files are in there

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2530994967

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 15:19:42 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:19:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System
 property resource.bundle.debug
In-Reply-To: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
References: <bje4yb7WC1EYM4ADwwOtrBgvM0a9KJRT3nZ1Cx-tHXE=.6ffb00c0-d3a2-47e3-ba42-1c88906d6c12@github.com>
Message-ID: <NnLtQGyQxW4ap2OfVSTQP3C7NkAu_QoS-43EaIjRbVU=.2dc42a8a-1223-45ae-8332-38fdbe527c78@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 17:22:14 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Replace broken getProperty with Boolean.getBoolean.
> 
> Manual testing confirms trace messages are enabled with `-Dresource.bundle.debug=true`

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 4f855d13
Author:    Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/4f855d1342d55aeee93b7d0c5796fbfd4994c856
Stats:     2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod

8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System property resource.bundle.debug

Reviewed-by: lancea, eirbjo

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22649

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 15:37:20 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:37:20 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of
 System property resource.bundle.debug
Message-ID: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>

Backport this trivial fix to parsing of the system property "resource.bundle.debug" to jdk24.

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

Commit messages:
 - Backport 4f855d1342d55aeee93b7d0c5796fbfd4994c856

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22664&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345818
  Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22664/head:pull/22664

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664

From prr at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 10 21:11:39 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 21:11:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <0IesHKVS6gy8WPLSFCevvtbtchywwafjo_iChBhuvds=.b02be63c-a28f-47a8-80d3-8293993d9c15@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
 <0IesHKVS6gy8WPLSFCevvtbtchywwafjo_iChBhuvds=.b02be63c-a28f-47a8-80d3-8293993d9c15@github.com>
Message-ID: <y5MxVqW2c_JJCwWbHTaY6bsutW7nMDH_NjpmXzBCzr0=.c833f43b-6d46-4c90-9a2c-c14521114297@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:31:21 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan <psadhukhan at openjdk.org> wrote:

> not sure why client label is added, no java.desktop/accessibility files are in there

I was puzzling over that too.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2532895836

From mli at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 11 09:40:38 2024
From: mli at openjdk.org (Hamlin Li)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 09:40:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <tvt6RZcQwnigoiXNxV7oGeyYq0BSns6TkNEXDsBKiJw=.8e107751-d6c5-4630-8670-c832bc24b973@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

Nice batch cleanup.

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

Marked as reviewed by mli (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2494928848

From lancea at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 11 11:41:40 2024
From: lancea at openjdk.org (Lance Andersen)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:41:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
Message-ID: <SnUMv7eXNRQU7c9T4Bi3BQkxaesNNYM1VxK3mY7ABJc=.102d4905-e86c-445e-8e31-e60a1a45249c@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 15:42:57 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
>> 
>> I have located these modified files using:
>> 
>> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
>> 
>> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
>> 
>> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert changes to binary files

Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#pullrequestreview-2495330243

From ihse at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 11 21:10:52 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 21:10:52 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed [v3]
In-Reply-To: <0IesHKVS6gy8WPLSFCevvtbtchywwafjo_iChBhuvds=.b02be63c-a28f-47a8-80d3-8293993d9c15@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
 <waZLxMZsHHF2vNEcHIEWemFnWeCIbHHYmW_lu8J3CAk=.0f2b5de6-b86d-4af8-a146-aeb5c83aabd1@github.com>
 <0IesHKVS6gy8WPLSFCevvtbtchywwafjo_iChBhuvds=.b02be63c-a28f-47a8-80d3-8293993d9c15@github.com>
Message-ID: <m7oETe1RAtaoT1NyVmjhpbwEWCluWGDzOMgGKjgE-FU=.d15b5616-c416-47aa-89f5-c816d893f45e@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:31:21 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan <psadhukhan at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Revert changes to binary files
>
> not sure why client label is added, no java.desktop/accessibility files are in there

@prsadhuk @prrace `src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/access/JavaAWTFontAccess.java` matches the pattern `"src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/access/\\w+AWT"` which is setup for `client` in the Skara `jdk.json` label configuration.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640#issuecomment-2537183864

From ihse at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 11 21:10:53 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 21:10:53 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 core-libs in files where it was missed
In-Reply-To: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
References: <HIlrlxPCx9fqeFmSDa-Jr3OYZVyz281dcc9klaRPK-Y=.da636218-fb0e-40b8-956d-c9c68064eb16@github.com>
Message-ID: <kZZWqqQs4ZIlaEEhWti7W4jqwB76v78dWz7Tk-kTzHE=.8da2847d-ec74-4fe4-b28e-e7c9a7b308b8@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:30:19 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: ddf04617
Author:    Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/ddf04617887dc389cd7667e820da7ac91eea9e8c
Stats:     441 lines in 441 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 441 mod

8345799: Update copyright year to 2024 for core-libs in files where it was missed

Reviewed-by: joehw, jlu, mli, lancea, kevinw

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22640

From ihse at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 11 21:32:44 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 21:32:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Integrated: 8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for
 client-libs in files where it was missed
In-Reply-To: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
References: <LSMkYeutk0vBWu79X0F8K8aRR4u5yS9j98BsLjU54Yw=.38e51803-bce7-4db0-a34d-d3b25e5d8a39@github.com>
Message-ID: <KBLEg-ISKQjc-5-AxgJmUTr2rlZZSsGFEaMDGduEnyE=.79e64752-e62a-4ff0-875c-068cf0bd6346@github.com>

On Mon, 9 Dec 2024 12:16:26 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Some files have been modified in 2024, but the copyright year has not been properly updated. This should be fixed. 
> 
> I have located these modified files using:
> 
> git log --since="Jan 1" --name-only --pretty=format: | sort -u > file.list
> 
> and then run a script to update the copyright year to 2024 on these files.
> 
> I have made a manual sampling of files in the list to verify that they have indeed been modified in 2024.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 64fad1c7
Author:    Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/64fad1c7d374bbc635bad3b1fa7941379f39565f
Stats:     342 lines in 342 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 342 mod

8345797: Update copyright year to 2024 for client-libs in files where it was missed

Reviewed-by: psadhukhan

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22638

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 12 15:48:39 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 15:48:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of
 System property resource.bundle.debug
In-Reply-To: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
References: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
Message-ID: <DVrq8vXjUASPpamld7cX1jnA7RuYf5EJMswr-6Ti-Ps=.b88042ca-80b0-454f-b929-a49df0e4c048@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:31:08 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Backport this trivial fix to parsing of the system property "resource.bundle.debug" to jdk24.

@LanceAndersen Please review

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664#issuecomment-2539329603

From lancea at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 12 17:24:38 2024
From: lancea at openjdk.org (Lance Andersen)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:24:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] RFR: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of
 System property resource.bundle.debug
In-Reply-To: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
References: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
Message-ID: <gtrO5Ir5SWYjyUdUIsNRA5Jqdkk6A1L2s9MTfHmHo2M=.80860664-ba22-40cf-b8c8-a46bddb5700c@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:31:08 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Backport this trivial fix to parsing of the system property "resource.bundle.debug" to jdk24.

Marked as reviewed by lancea (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664#pullrequestreview-2500333810

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 12 17:30:44 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:30:44 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> [jdk24] Integrated: 8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing
 of System property resource.bundle.debug
In-Reply-To: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
References: <f74f6YnKpnnfk33mIaYwvR0QbNYhxg9Xch4IIlHrz2E=.0159ba76-c151-4c33-ab31-00086c4bd2eb@github.com>
Message-ID: <9dMt0wB4pGO9tmIjgxbPNj5RhXSMx1oZcdBk0a7VV1U=.5e87d68c-3532-4ee7-b85e-f79108a6398b@github.com>

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 15:31:08 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Backport this trivial fix to parsing of the system property "resource.bundle.debug" to jdk24.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 3b53ed7f
Author:    Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/3b53ed7fb000d108bc4e98224d2db9322d8263a4
Stats:     2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod

8345818: Fix SM cleanup of parsing of System property resource.bundle.debug

Reviewed-by: lancea
Backport-of: 4f855d1342d55aeee93b7d0c5796fbfd4994c856

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22664

From isipka at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 12 17:31:12 2024
From: isipka at openjdk.org (Ivan =?UTF-8?B?xaBpcGth?=)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:31:12 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346117: added @test annotations
Message-ID: <I1-jiSNasv_EBanj7IZkHIS-QMShkRhwJhhU_xnIaHE=.cd344907-21eb-45b5-9008-157b66e4262f@github.com>

@mahendrachhipa @bwhuang-us @serhiysachkov

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

Commit messages:
 - added @test annotations

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22717/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22717&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346117
  Stats: 2 lines in 2 files changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22717.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22717/head:pull/22717

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22717

From shurailine at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 12 17:41:37 2024
From: shurailine at openjdk.org (Alexandre Iline)
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 17:41:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346117: Add test annotation
In-Reply-To: <I1-jiSNasv_EBanj7IZkHIS-QMShkRhwJhhU_xnIaHE=.cd344907-21eb-45b5-9008-157b66e4262f@github.com>
References: <I1-jiSNasv_EBanj7IZkHIS-QMShkRhwJhhU_xnIaHE=.cd344907-21eb-45b5-9008-157b66e4262f@github.com>
Message-ID: <gCnazisiy1ZLOZt5MQ-DPrwI_1i_lGn3SfZFLP2slV0=.332b4601-5de9-4bcc-866e-42ade9aabbb7@github.com>

On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:59:58 GMT, Ivan ?ipka <isipka at openjdk.org> wrote:

> @mahendrachhipa @bwhuang-us @serhiysachkov

It would make sense to at least run these tests on all supported platforms to make sure nothing wrong with them.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22717#issuecomment-2539596629

From ihse at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 18 17:06:02 2024
From: ihse at openjdk.org (Magnus Ihse Bursie)
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 17:06:02 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344191: Build code should not have classpath
 exception [v2]
In-Reply-To: <U0XAHfEgxgfvcpBaj8aOZgQgk0cU-GyAMyeJ9cyJrUA=.84aeedaa-ef83-48e9-9eea-1de1e8d0afd6@github.com>
References: <U0XAHfEgxgfvcpBaj8aOZgQgk0cU-GyAMyeJ9cyJrUA=.84aeedaa-ef83-48e9-9eea-1de1e8d0afd6@github.com>
Message-ID: <ijADYihbrxVpLB0pKhpDV8WjUna-2nhvsbx-9qjhukI=.48fc275e-4579-4523-bfba-3992fe0c3d0f@github.com>

> In several (most? all?) of the build system files, the copyright header includes the classpath exception. This makes no sense, and should be removed. 
> 
> I have removed the classpath exception from makefiles, autoconf, shell scripts, properties files, configuration files, IDE support files, build tools and data.
> 
> The only places where the classpath exception is still kept in the make directory is as text strings in some build tools, which generate source code that is bundled with `src.zip`, and thus *must* have the classpath exception.
> 
> This is a huge and autogenerated, but content-wise trivial, PR, and I know such are hard to review. I recommend looking at the entire diff file instead of checking this file-by-file in the Github web GUI. (That's bound to be a painful experience)

Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:

 - Merge branch 'master' into remove-build-classpath-exception
 - Update build tools, data and IDE support
 - Update makefiles, autoconf, shell scripts, properties files and configuration files

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

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22104/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22104&range=01
  Stats: 1994 lines in 555 files changed: 0 ins; 1120 del; 874 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22104.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22104/head:pull/22104

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22104

From asemenyuk at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 18 18:58:40 2024
From: asemenyuk at openjdk.org (Alexey Semenyuk)
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 18:58:40 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8344191: Build code should not have classpath
 exception [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ijADYihbrxVpLB0pKhpDV8WjUna-2nhvsbx-9qjhukI=.48fc275e-4579-4523-bfba-3992fe0c3d0f@github.com>
References: <U0XAHfEgxgfvcpBaj8aOZgQgk0cU-GyAMyeJ9cyJrUA=.84aeedaa-ef83-48e9-9eea-1de1e8d0afd6@github.com>
 <ijADYihbrxVpLB0pKhpDV8WjUna-2nhvsbx-9qjhukI=.48fc275e-4579-4523-bfba-3992fe0c3d0f@github.com>
Message-ID: <Jzc-zFSvSRq41LPZQUXveoZoJSEMv30oszPC8Qm23mw=.f0743a79-082c-42b7-ac9d-e31515838f5f@github.com>

On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 17:06:02 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In several (most? all?) of the build system files, the copyright header includes the classpath exception. This makes no sense, and should be removed. 
>> 
>> I have removed the classpath exception from makefiles, autoconf, shell scripts, properties files, configuration files, IDE support files, build tools and data.
>> 
>> The only places where the classpath exception is still kept in the make directory is as text strings in some build tools, which generate source code that is bundled with `src.zip`, and thus *must* have the classpath exception.
>> 
>> This is a huge and autogenerated, but content-wise trivial, PR, and I know such are hard to review. I recommend looking at the entire diff file instead of checking this file-by-file in the Github web GUI. (That's bound to be a painful experience)
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into remove-build-classpath-exception
>  - Update build tools, data and IDE support
>  - Update makefiles, autoconf, shell scripts, properties files and configuration files

jpackage changes look good. $0.02

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

Marked as reviewed by asemenyuk (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22104#pullrequestreview-2512625117

From naoto at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 19 22:18:16 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 22:18:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8175709: DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId()
 has misleading JavaDoc
Message-ID: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>

Clarifying the documentation of `DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId()` and similar methods to align the description with the behavior, in which `ZoneOffset` is only parsed from the formatter for offset texts without any prefixes. Corresponding CSR has also been drafted.

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

Commit messages:
 - initial commit

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22837&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8175709
  Stats: 34 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 34 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22837/head:pull/22837

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 17:11:35 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:11:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8175709:
 DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId() has misleading JavaDoc
In-Reply-To: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
References: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
Message-ID: <pKw98csfPGtE0xASTo8VD-3NdLjtFTCGjjcAMQJ3Nvk=.6e12eeca-7e9a-4e29-bef6-466c836ca275@github.com>

On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 22:12:52 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Clarifying the documentation of `DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId()` and similar methods to align the description with the behavior, in which `ZoneOffset` is only parsed from the formatter for offset texts without any prefixes. Corresponding CSR has also been drafted.

src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/format/DateTimeFormatterBuilder.java line 1154:

> 1152:      * offset-based zone and will not match region-based zones. The offset
> 1153:      * ID parsing is equivalent to using {@link #appendOffset(String, String)}
> 1154:      * using the arguments 'HH:MM:ss' and the no offset string '0'.

The change to drop UT, UTC, GMT, from offset parsing, looks to be correct.
However, it does accept parsing of the offset formatted strings in contradiction to the 2nd paragraph above.
``` 
     * This appends an instruction to format/parse the zone ID to the builder
     * only if it is a region-based ID.

This pre-existing text is also isn't clear in that the formatter is always appended to the builder.
The accepting only of a region-based ID occurs when the DateTimeFormatter.parse(...) is parsing.
Perhaps a separate clarification may be useful

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837#discussion_r1894185376

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 18:12:17 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:12:17 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8175709:
 DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId() has misleading JavaDoc [v2]
In-Reply-To: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
References: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
Message-ID: <5HcT8q1Ais4MPisgJy8EQLH4ZIGjepWPMm31JU45C4c=.d4cd0e34-711f-4234-b269-888a46fb1eb3@github.com>

> Clarifying the documentation of `DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId()` and similar methods to align the description with the behavior, in which `ZoneOffset` is only parsed from the formatter for offset texts without any prefixes. Corresponding CSR has also been drafted.

Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Reflects review comments

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837/files/36d3e8c7..5439c2c8

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22837&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22837&range=00-01

  Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22837/head:pull/22837

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 18:14:37 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:14:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8175709:
 DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId() has misleading JavaDoc [v2]
In-Reply-To: <pKw98csfPGtE0xASTo8VD-3NdLjtFTCGjjcAMQJ3Nvk=.6e12eeca-7e9a-4e29-bef6-466c836ca275@github.com>
References: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
 <pKw98csfPGtE0xASTo8VD-3NdLjtFTCGjjcAMQJ3Nvk=.6e12eeca-7e9a-4e29-bef6-466c836ca275@github.com>
Message-ID: <8LAMUrBjAylFP-crB8jP_zZKrZDyj0u2j_xtUlb61Vg=.2f5326e2-9fb6-46c3-8a82-28d379465601@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 17:09:26 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Reflects review comments
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/format/DateTimeFormatterBuilder.java line 1154:
> 
>> 1152:      * offset-based zone and will not match region-based zones. The offset
>> 1153:      * ID parsing is equivalent to using {@link #appendOffset(String, String)}
>> 1154:      * using the arguments 'HH:MM:ss' and the no offset string '0'.
> 
> The change to drop UT, UTC, GMT, from offset parsing, looks to be correct.
> However, it does accept parsing of the offset formatted strings in contradiction to the 2nd paragraph above.
> ``` 
>      * This appends an instruction to format/parse the zone ID to the builder
>      * only if it is a region-based ID.
> 
> This pre-existing text is also isn't clear in that the formatter is always appended to the builder.
> The accepting only of a region-based ID occurs when the DateTimeFormatter.parse(...) is parsing.
> Perhaps a separate clarification may be useful

Thanks, Roger. Updated the description per your suggestion.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837#discussion_r1894246676

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 19:59:50 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:59:50 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression
Message-ID: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>

The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.

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

Commit messages:
 - initial commit

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22854&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345668
  Stats: 78 lines in 4 files changed: 69 ins; 0 del; 9 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22854/head:pull/22854

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 20:29:34 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:29:34 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression
In-Reply-To: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
Message-ID: <i-QHSsThhcjPsSxn_otIPdxiABJN_YTR7Ir9SZ-5tyo=.b46cb07b-0505-4017-8ab8-ca63087711fc@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 19:55:06 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.

src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java line 432:

> 430:                 result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
> 431:                 SECONDS_CACHE.putIfAbsent(totalSecs, result);
> 432:                 result = SECONDS_CACHE.get(totalSecs);

putIfAbsent() returns the existing value (if any), the 2nd get can be avoided by using the non-null value if returned or returning the result just created.
Suggestion:

                var existing = SECONDS_CACHE.putIfAbsent(totalSecs, result);
                return (existing != null) ? existing : result;

It should perform better than doing the `get` again.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894362437

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 20:58:22 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:58:22 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v2]
In-Reply-To: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
Message-ID: <WPGSjKgRrAT5YrgI0XvrCFPG6YXB0dak_U-hD338lj8=.5c1f8c7a-15d6-42a0-abfc-28ef19489d36@github.com>

> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.

Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java
  
  Co-authored-by: Roger Riggs <Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com>

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854/files/3df7e9f1..1e09b8be

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22854&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22854&range=00-01

  Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22854/head:pull/22854

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 20:58:22 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:58:22 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v2]
In-Reply-To: <i-QHSsThhcjPsSxn_otIPdxiABJN_YTR7Ir9SZ-5tyo=.b46cb07b-0505-4017-8ab8-ca63087711fc@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <i-QHSsThhcjPsSxn_otIPdxiABJN_YTR7Ir9SZ-5tyo=.b46cb07b-0505-4017-8ab8-ca63087711fc@github.com>
Message-ID: <G_wFehK5vstwcYpiVQfIQbznoCYeyj9EcO6EZr99_Y4=.cfea1c6b-e772-4010-91e8-50eeb1cbfe86@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:25:28 GMT, Roger Riggs <rriggs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java
>>   
>>   Co-authored-by: Roger Riggs <Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com>
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java line 432:
> 
>> 430:                 result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
>> 431:                 SECONDS_CACHE.putIfAbsent(totalSecs, result);
>> 432:                 result = SECONDS_CACHE.get(totalSecs);
> 
> putIfAbsent() returns the existing value (if any), the 2nd get can be avoided by using the non-null value if returned or returning the result just created.
> Suggestion:
> 
>                 var existing = SECONDS_CACHE.putIfAbsent(totalSecs, result);
>                 return (existing != null) ? existing : result;
> 
> It should perform better than doing the `get` again.

That's right. Committed as suggested

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894382433

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 21:06:16 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:06:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
Message-ID: <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>

> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.

Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Fixed compile error

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854/files/1e09b8be..8dca103a

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22854&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22854&range=01-02

  Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22854/head:pull/22854

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854

From rriggs at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 22:52:35 2024
From: rriggs at openjdk.org (Roger Riggs)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 22:52:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8175709:
 DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId() has misleading JavaDoc [v2]
In-Reply-To: <5HcT8q1Ais4MPisgJy8EQLH4ZIGjepWPMm31JU45C4c=.d4cd0e34-711f-4234-b269-888a46fb1eb3@github.com>
References: <RpFc5FkbmLpataxJKWvhDX5EzARjicAKqSmVuDcvrMU=.f3d26591-5082-4e24-a2f7-ed0a1264e701@github.com>
 <5HcT8q1Ais4MPisgJy8EQLH4ZIGjepWPMm31JU45C4c=.d4cd0e34-711f-4234-b269-888a46fb1eb3@github.com>
Message-ID: <rDVqxLPIP3QxbtKCTbXLkVtIzHQio4b4USIykog7qxc=.4eb11bdc-bb08-4399-afd0-0d96a5cae836@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 18:12:17 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Clarifying the documentation of `DateTimeFormatterBuilder.appendZoneId()` and similar methods to align the description with the behavior, in which `ZoneOffset` is only parsed from the formatter for offset texts without any prefixes. Corresponding CSR has also been drafted.
>
> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Reflects review comments

lgtm

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

Marked as reviewed by rriggs (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22837#pullrequestreview-2518472240

From swen at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 23:07:35 2024
From: swen at openjdk.org (Shaojin Wen)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:07:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
Message-ID: <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:06:16 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.
>
> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fixed compile error

src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java line 428:

> 426:         if (totalSeconds % (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE) == 0) {
> 427:             Integer totalSecs = totalSeconds;
> 428:             ZoneOffset result = SECONDS_CACHE.get(totalSecs);

Here, each call may allocate an Integer object. The maximum number of ZoneOffsets that need to be cached here is only 148. Using AtomicReferenceArray is better than AtomicConcurrentHashMap.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894486852

From swen at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 23:10:53 2024
From: swen at openjdk.org (Shaojin Wen)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:10:53 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>
Message-ID: <LzQLk5Gjz3ENU2dzUpvib3OABCcnTqmiMgkCQarFSmA=.417120b5-2f95-4070-af9f-c1b0e4d7a425@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:05:06 GMT, Shaojin Wen <swen at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Fixed compile error
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java line 428:
> 
>> 426:         if (totalSeconds % (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE) == 0) {
>> 427:             Integer totalSecs = totalSeconds;
>> 428:             ZoneOffset result = SECONDS_CACHE.get(totalSecs);
> 
> Here, each call may allocate an Integer object. The maximum number of ZoneOffsets that need to be cached here is only 148. Using AtomicReferenceArray is better than AtomicConcurrentHashMap.

For example:

    static final class Cache {
              static final AtomicReferenceArray<ZoneOffset> MINUTES_15_CACHE = new AtomicReferenceArray<>(18 * 2 * 4);
    }
    public static ZoneOffset ofTotalSeconds(int totalSeconds) {
        // ...
        int minutes15Rem = totalSeconds / (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE);
        if (totalSeconds - minutes15Rem * 15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE == 0) {
            int cacheIndex = minutes15Rem + 18;
            ZoneOffset result = Cache.MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(cacheIndex);
            if (result == null) {
                result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
                if (!Cache.MINUTES_15_CACHE.compareAndSet(cacheIndex, null, result)) {
                    result = Cache.MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(minutes15Rem);
                }
            }
            return result;
        }
       // ...
    }

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894488013

From naoto at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 20 23:51:36 2024
From: naoto at openjdk.org (Naoto Sato)
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:51:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <LzQLk5Gjz3ENU2dzUpvib3OABCcnTqmiMgkCQarFSmA=.417120b5-2f95-4070-af9f-c1b0e4d7a425@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>
 <LzQLk5Gjz3ENU2dzUpvib3OABCcnTqmiMgkCQarFSmA=.417120b5-2f95-4070-af9f-c1b0e4d7a425@github.com>
Message-ID: <PlH5j8K65CASYrQPHG-Y2IxFXqA5RRH21LI6dkOFGLY=.f4ea7c72-c7f4-4861-b989-c04840df2a7e@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:07:47 GMT, Shaojin Wen <swen at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/ZoneOffset.java line 428:
>> 
>>> 426:         if (totalSeconds % (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE) == 0) {
>>> 427:             Integer totalSecs = totalSeconds;
>>> 428:             ZoneOffset result = SECONDS_CACHE.get(totalSecs);
>> 
>> Here, each call may allocate an Integer object. The maximum number of ZoneOffsets that need to be cached here is only 148. Using AtomicReferenceArray is better than AtomicConcurrentHashMap.
>
> For example:
> 
> static final AtomicReferenceArray<ZoneOffset> MINUTES_15_CACHE = new AtomicReferenceArray<>(37 * 4);
> 
>     public static ZoneOffset ofTotalSeconds(int totalSeconds) {
>         // ...
>         int minutes15Rem = totalSeconds / (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE);
>         if (totalSeconds - minutes15Rem * 15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE == 0) {
>             int cacheIndex = minutes15Rem + 18 * 4;
>             ZoneOffset result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(cacheIndex);
>             if (result == null) {
>                 result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
>                 if (!MINUTES_15_CACHE.compareAndSet(cacheIndex, null, result)) {
>                     result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(minutes15Rem);
>                 }
>             }
>             return result;
>         }
>        // ...
>     }

Hi Shaojin,
Thanks for the suggestion, but I am not planning to improve the code more than backing out the offending fix at this time. (btw, cache size would be 149 as 18:00 and -18:00 are inclusive)

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894505406

From swen at openjdk.org  Sat Dec 21 00:02:35 2024
From: swen at openjdk.org (Shaojin Wen)
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:02:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <PlH5j8K65CASYrQPHG-Y2IxFXqA5RRH21LI6dkOFGLY=.f4ea7c72-c7f4-4861-b989-c04840df2a7e@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>
 <LzQLk5Gjz3ENU2dzUpvib3OABCcnTqmiMgkCQarFSmA=.417120b5-2f95-4070-af9f-c1b0e4d7a425@github.com>
 <PlH5j8K65CASYrQPHG-Y2IxFXqA5RRH21LI6dkOFGLY=.f4ea7c72-c7f4-4861-b989-c04840df2a7e@github.com>
Message-ID: <FjF51IkP-4LSUsZSkiYggSB7tZHgi74hs-YGh69nOwQ=.4661bc23-bff5-4596-b6a4-f64a75a88fda@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:46:57 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> For example:
>> 
>> static final AtomicReferenceArray<ZoneOffset> MINUTES_15_CACHE = new AtomicReferenceArray<>(37 * 4);
>> 
>>     public static ZoneOffset ofTotalSeconds(int totalSeconds) {
>>         // ...
>>         int minutes15Rem = totalSeconds / (15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE);
>>         if (totalSeconds - minutes15Rem * 15 * SECONDS_PER_MINUTE == 0) {
>>             int cacheIndex = minutes15Rem + 18 * 4;
>>             ZoneOffset result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(cacheIndex);
>>             if (result == null) {
>>                 result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
>>                 if (!MINUTES_15_CACHE.compareAndSet(cacheIndex, null, result)) {
>>                     result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(minutes15Rem);
>>                 }
>>             }
>>             return result;
>>         }
>>        // ...
>>     }
>
> Hi Shaojin,
> Thanks for the suggestion, but I am not planning to improve the code more than backing out the offending fix at this time. (btw, cache size would be 149 as 18:00 and -18:00 are inclusive)

Can I submit a PR to make this improvement?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894509276

From liach at openjdk.org  Sat Dec 21 00:45:35 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:45:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <FjF51IkP-4LSUsZSkiYggSB7tZHgi74hs-YGh69nOwQ=.4661bc23-bff5-4596-b6a4-f64a75a88fda@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <gIgRGHHLB8khlaUkTaWpD94mb7xLEviQnDhbq7cr7IA=.c73024df-255d-49f1-9752-c3a1de043133@github.com>
 <LzQLk5Gjz3ENU2dzUpvib3OABCcnTqmiMgkCQarFSmA=.417120b5-2f95-4070-af9f-c1b0e4d7a425@github.com>
 <PlH5j8K65CASYrQPHG-Y2IxFXqA5RRH21LI6dkOFGLY=.f4ea7c72-c7f4-4861-b989-c04840df2a7e@github.com>
 <FjF51IkP-4LSUsZSkiYggSB7tZHgi74hs-YGh69nOwQ=.4661bc23-bff5-4596-b6a4-f64a75a88fda@github.com>
Message-ID: <B1EPdQV4gZ8uiynuPjpxITKbClL1XAqWXUp4P7M26b4=.285d4187-4668-4d47-bfdf-8f4377627e64@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 23:59:30 GMT, Shaojin Wen <swen at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hi Shaojin,
>> Thanks for the suggestion, but I am not planning to improve the code more than backing out the offending fix at this time. (btw, cache size would be 149 as 18:00 and -18:00 are inclusive)
>
> Can I submit a PR to make this improvement?

@wenshao I agree with your proposal. Also for this part:

ZoneOffset result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(cacheIndex);
if (result == null) {
    result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
    if (!MINUTES_15_CACHE.compareAndSet(cacheIndex, null, result)) {
        result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.get(minutes15Rem);
    }
}


I recommend a rewrite:


ZoneOffset result = MINUTES_15_CACHE.getPlain(cacheIndex);
if (result == null) {
    result = new ZoneOffset(totalSeconds);
    ZoneOffset existing = MINUTES_15_CACHE.compareAndExchange(cacheIndex, null, result);
    return existing == null ? result : existing;
}


The `getPlain` is safe because `ZoneOffset` is thread safe, so you can use the object when you can observe a `ZoneOffset` object reference.  Also `compareAndExchange` avoids extra operations if we failed to racily set the computed `ZoneOffset`.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894520408

From liach at openjdk.org  Sat Dec 21 00:59:42 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:59:42 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
Message-ID: <nYKT5FA9Mh7gSZidXOZaNu0EeYQDqxO-UecpZ1K4siQ=.cc81b75e-ba33-45a2-960f-0cd6cfba60aa@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:06:16 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.
>
> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fixed compile error

Changes requested by liach (Reviewer).

The `putIfAbsent` remark from Roger Riggs applies to `DateTimeTextProvider` and `DecimalStyle` too.  I think reusing existing result in these two places is beneficial, as the replaced `computeIfAbsent` returns the same object identity which may be helpful for quick `equals` comparisons.

test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/time/ZoneOffsetBench.java line 49:

> 47:     public void ofTotalSeconds() {
> 48:         for (int i = 0; i < 1_000; i++) {
> 49:             ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0);

This benchmark method should accept a `Blackhole`, and the return value of `ofTotalSeconds` must be sent to the `Blackhole.consume` method.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#pullrequestreview-2518538592
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#issuecomment-2557926553
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894522864

From liach at openjdk.org  Sat Dec 21 01:02:35 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2024 01:02:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <nYKT5FA9Mh7gSZidXOZaNu0EeYQDqxO-UecpZ1K4siQ=.cc81b75e-ba33-45a2-960f-0cd6cfba60aa@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <nYKT5FA9Mh7gSZidXOZaNu0EeYQDqxO-UecpZ1K4siQ=.cc81b75e-ba33-45a2-960f-0cd6cfba60aa@github.com>
Message-ID: <5bjf0rolvoU_PbPLWY7F2OLgeHiN46goT3tPyqzmM0g=.0d6dafd5-e045-4b79-ac5e-76a256a910d7@github.com>

On Sat, 21 Dec 2024 00:54:34 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Fixed compile error
>
> test/micro/org/openjdk/bench/java/time/ZoneOffsetBench.java line 49:
> 
>> 47:     public void ofTotalSeconds() {
>> 48:         for (int i = 0; i < 1_000; i++) {
>> 49:             ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0);
> 
> This benchmark method should accept a `Blackhole`, and the return value of `ofTotalSeconds` must be sent to the `Blackhole.consume` method.

This benchmark currently works probably because the cache interactions in `ofTotalSeconds`, which means JIT compilation cannot prove it is side-effect free.  Had it been as simple as a decimal computation or if the cache becomes a stable map, JIT compilation can eliminate the static factory method call entirely, and the benchmark would be measuring the performance of no-op invocation.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1894523813

From qxing at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 09:50:10 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:50:10 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
Message-ID: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>

This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

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

Commit messages:
 - Fix unmatched brackets in source files.

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22861&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346773
  Stats: 2244 lines in 25 files changed: 2211 ins; 2 del; 31 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22861/head:pull/22861

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861

From erikj at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 14:05:35 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 14:05:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
Message-ID: <S-WFhl3OYtxnxMvPlMMI2tSqGzCrdVYDmB1oN7jL_lk=.0510eda6-8a48-4cba-8862-f2f229edbe46@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:45:00 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

I can really only review the doc files and the Makefile.

doc/hotspot-unit-tests.md line 175:

> 173: there is no need to have them in error messages. Asserts print only
> 174: compared values, they do not print any of interim variables, e.g.
> 175: `ASSERT_TRUE(val1 == val2 && isFail(foo(8)) || i == 18)` prints only

Looking at this expression, I believe the intention is this.
Suggestion:

`ASSERT_TRUE((val1 == val2 && isFail(foo(8))) || i == 18)` prints only

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2520648246
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1895785097

From jlu at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 17:13:36 2024
From: jlu at openjdk.org (Justin Lu)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 17:13:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
Message-ID: <Wvl3SUC6VY0yp14dgXMiXB9TaAJg6FncZSY51kjl5R8=.820767b6-bccb-4987-bbd2-7ae6a612da5a@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:45:00 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

make/data/cldr/common/main/kn.xml line 1085:

> 1083: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic">????????? ??????????</type>
> 1084: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic-civil">?????????-?????? ??????????</type>
> 1085: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic-rgsa" draft="contributed">?????????? ??????????? (???? ???????, ????????)</type>

Hi, we would not modify the contents of upstream data from CLDR.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1895964999

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 19:36:36 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:36:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
Message-ID: <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 09:45:00 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

I strongly suggest avoiding omnibus changes like this when possible (which it
is here). Just because it's all about one "kind" of change doesn't make it a
cohesive change. This is touching many distinct areas of the JDK, and several
different languages as well. That makes it harder to review and to manage the
review, because it is large and affects a wide range of areas, so may need
many reviewers. And the whole thing might get stalled by discussion of one
piece.

There is also no mention of what testing has been done for this PR. Some of
the changes are in executable code, and need to be tested.

I think that all of the files in make/data/cldr/common are from the Unicode
Consortium, and should not be modified here.

doc/hotspot-unit-tests.html line 248:

> 246: so there is no need to have them in error messages. Asserts print only
> 247: compared values, they do not print any of interim variables, e.g.
> 248: <code>ASSERT_TRUE(val1 == val2 &amp;&amp; isFail(foo(8)) || i == 18)</code>

This file is generated from the .md file, and should not be edited directly.

test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary/ctw/Makefile line 50:

> 48:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jdk/test/lib/util \
> 49:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jtreg \
> 50:     -maxdepth 1 -name '*.java')

I wonder why this hasn't caused problems and been found long ago?  Does make just drop that stray
close-paren?

test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/Bug8169112.xsl line 65:

> 63:           @page { margin: 0.1in; }
> 64: 
> 65:           }

Does this affect the behavior of the test this is part of?

test/jdk/sanity/client/lib/SwingSet3/src/com/sun/swingset3/demos/table/resources/oscars.xml line 2:

> 1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> 2: <oscars xmlns:osc-results="http://www.fatdog.com/oscar-results"

I can't tell whether anything was changed in this file other than the modification of all the end of
line indicators. I've no idea whether changing those is appropriate or not, but this file came from
a 3rd party, so might not be appropriate to change here.

test/jdk/sanity/client/lib/SwingSet3/src/com/sun/swingset3/demos/table/resources/oscars.xml line 2:

> 1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> 2: <oscars xmlns:osc-results="http://www.fatdog.com/oscar-results"

Does this change affect the behavior of the associated test(s)?

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

Changes requested by kbarrett (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2521031190
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896040106
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896050113
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896061137
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896064083
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896064580

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 19:45:35 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:45:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
Message-ID: <o9cZHHS4iQ1l-qTxASqqtTQ6WMijrJ0ZDrPrOYSYzak=.e40da9cf-374f-44b0-ae3c-3f48b77f5df6@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:33:36 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

> That makes it harder to review and to manage the review, because it is large and affects a wide range of areas, so may need many reviewers.

And many of the appropriate reviewers might be unavailable for a while, since it's right before Christmas.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#issuecomment-2560215378

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 20:33:36 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 20:33:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
Message-ID: <rNpIv9ErIdEqWQqzp5xb0Pn0Wn1PGjxThYJAThp80Z4=.323068e8-70cc-476b-ad80-48ce14db92d7@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:30:56 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.
>
> test/jdk/sanity/client/lib/SwingSet3/src/com/sun/swingset3/demos/table/resources/oscars.xml line 2:
> 
>> 1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> 2: <oscars xmlns:osc-results="http://www.fatdog.com/oscar-results"
> 
> Does this change affect the behavior of the associated test(s)?

I was also wondering how this was tested.

> test/jdk/sanity/client/lib/SwingSet3/src/com/sun/swingset3/demos/table/resources/oscars.xml line 2:
> 
>> 1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>> 2: <oscars xmlns:osc-results="http://www.fatdog.com/oscar-results"
> 
> I can't tell whether anything was changed in this file other than the modification of all the end of
> line indicators. I've no idea whether changing those is appropriate or not, but this file came from
> a 3rd party, so might not be appropriate to change here.

+1 to all of that. This change is un-reviewable.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896100629
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896100936

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 20:33:34 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 20:33:34 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <o9cZHHS4iQ1l-qTxASqqtTQ6WMijrJ0ZDrPrOYSYzak=.e40da9cf-374f-44b0-ae3c-3f48b77f5df6@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <o9cZHHS4iQ1l-qTxASqqtTQ6WMijrJ0ZDrPrOYSYzak=.e40da9cf-374f-44b0-ae3c-3f48b77f5df6@github.com>
Message-ID: <PFz3alfIjjgTruEYo0zh1sF7VlmWQfYSm5zVAbgWMZM=.16f79e13-f7ca-4311-81f5-a66874094766@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:42:34 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

> > That makes it harder to review and to manage the review, because it is large and affects a wide range of areas, so may need many reviewers.
> 
> And many of the appropriate reviewers might be unavailable for a while, since it's right before Christmas.

I think at the very least this needs multiple reviewers. Even 2 isn't enough considering it is so cross-area.
It went to 7 different mailing lists, so that should tell you something !

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#issuecomment-2560263514

From prr at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 23 22:18:35 2024
From: prr at openjdk.org (Phil Race)
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 22:18:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
In-Reply-To: <rNpIv9ErIdEqWQqzp5xb0Pn0Wn1PGjxThYJAThp80Z4=.323068e8-70cc-476b-ad80-48ce14db92d7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <rNpIv9ErIdEqWQqzp5xb0Pn0Wn1PGjxThYJAThp80Z4=.323068e8-70cc-476b-ad80-48ce14db92d7@github.com>
Message-ID: <_AIqmu61ZK3rRO-44sivWfkuH1ceJm8bQ3MtL2cu8vs=.f4c3bb3b-3697-4ba4-8199-0f1cf9f2f047@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 20:29:09 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/jdk/sanity/client/lib/SwingSet3/src/com/sun/swingset3/demos/table/resources/oscars.xml line 2:
>> 
>>> 1: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>>> 2: <oscars xmlns:osc-results="http://www.fatdog.com/oscar-results"
>> 
>> Does this change affect the behavior of the associated test(s)?
>
> I was also wondering how this was tested.

FYI, the way to test this is ..
cd test/jdk
jtreg sanity/client/SwingSet/src/TableDemoTest.java

I tried converting all ^M to \n in this file another repo and comparing with your patch but every line was different so I just can't review this.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896162028

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:26:23 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:23 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
Message-ID: <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>

> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:

 - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
 - Do not touch files in test.
 - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861/files/540312c4..ec3e6aa5

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22861&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22861&range=00-01

  Stats: 2235 lines in 19 files changed: 2 ins; 2211 del; 22 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22861/head:pull/22861

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:26:24 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:24 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
Message-ID: <qToKH3NIiVa0fL7Lyd8VoUIjdMf1kohn_JEMNJE5A4s=.1fd147f1-fe89-46f0-8ffa-57aeef5d2d24@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 18:57:39 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>>  - Do not touch files in test.
>>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.
>
> doc/hotspot-unit-tests.html line 248:
> 
>> 246: so there is no need to have them in error messages. Asserts print only
>> 247: compared values, they do not print any of interim variables, e.g.
>> 248: <code>ASSERT_TRUE(val1 == val2 &amp;&amp; isFail(foo(8)) || i == 18)</code>
> 
> This file is generated from the .md file, and should not be edited directly.

Updated both `.md` and `.html` using `make update-build-docs` in the latest commit.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896332803

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:26:24 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:24 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <Wvl3SUC6VY0yp14dgXMiXB9TaAJg6FncZSY51kjl5R8=.820767b6-bccb-4987-bbd2-7ae6a612da5a@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <Wvl3SUC6VY0yp14dgXMiXB9TaAJg6FncZSY51kjl5R8=.820767b6-bccb-4987-bbd2-7ae6a612da5a@github.com>
Message-ID: <rjeNtZS_8Tl4gLjpg0W0gwCSOIHIHcU0VfNB1_P9D1Y=.69d45611-fded-4d4d-96d5-89e33ab6addc@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 17:11:14 GMT, Justin Lu <jlu at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>>  - Do not touch files in test.
>>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.
>
> make/data/cldr/common/main/kn.xml line 1085:
> 
>> 1083: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic">????????? ??????????</type>
>> 1084: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic-civil">?????????-?????? ??????????</type>
>> 1085: 			<type key="calendar" type="islamic-rgsa" draft="contributed">?????????? ??????????? (???? ???????, ????????)</type>
> 
> Hi, we would not modify the contents of upstream data from CLDR.

Sorry, I've reverted these changes in the latest commit.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896331971

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:26:24 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:24 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <S-WFhl3OYtxnxMvPlMMI2tSqGzCrdVYDmB1oN7jL_lk=.0510eda6-8a48-4cba-8862-f2f229edbe46@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <S-WFhl3OYtxnxMvPlMMI2tSqGzCrdVYDmB1oN7jL_lk=.0510eda6-8a48-4cba-8862-f2f229edbe46@github.com>
Message-ID: <4QfTqVdt_-vwDpQQAaeiElZLvHDDBabcyBtISbLrmPo=.7aa033a5-d09b-4193-9d2e-1336167a10ce@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 14:00:54 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>>  - Do not touch files in test.
>>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.
>
> doc/hotspot-unit-tests.md line 175:
> 
>> 173: there is no need to have them in error messages. Asserts print only
>> 174: compared values, they do not print any of interim variables, e.g.
>> 175: `ASSERT_TRUE(val1 == val2 && isFail(foo(8)) || i == 18)` prints only
> 
> Looking at this expression, I believe the intention is this.
> Suggestion:
> 
> `ASSERT_TRUE((val1 == val2 && isFail(foo(8))) || i == 18)` prints only

Thanks for the suggestion, updated.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896331528

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:32:36 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:32:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
Message-ID: <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:13:09 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>>  - Do not touch files in test.
>>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.
>
> test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary/ctw/Makefile line 50:
> 
>> 48:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jdk/test/lib/util \
>> 49:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jtreg \
>> 50:     -maxdepth 1 -name '*.java')
> 
> I wonder why this hasn't caused problems and been found long ago?  Does make just drop that stray
> close-paren?

I've tested this by running `make`, and the previous Makefile reports an error like file `test/lib/jtreg/SkippedException.java)` not found. So this fix is necessary.

I also checked the git log, this change was introduced in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22420, not that long ago.

> test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/unittest/transform/Bug8169112.xsl line 65:
> 
>> 63:           @page { margin: 0.1in; }
>> 64: 
>> 65:           }
> 
> Does this affect the behavior of the test this is part of?

Reverted.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896336118
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896337303

From qxing at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 03:35:47 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:35:47 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <_AIqmu61ZK3rRO-44sivWfkuH1ceJm8bQ3MtL2cu8vs=.f4c3bb3b-3697-4ba4-8199-0f1cf9f2f047@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <rNpIv9ErIdEqWQqzp5xb0Pn0Wn1PGjxThYJAThp80Z4=.323068e8-70cc-476b-ad80-48ce14db92d7@github.com>
 <_AIqmu61ZK3rRO-44sivWfkuH1ceJm8bQ3MtL2cu8vs=.f4c3bb3b-3697-4ba4-8199-0f1cf9f2f047@github.com>
Message-ID: <bs7fuVeUaVtrunvJFhOMsam8pz9Oi43_cTdEk0c2Wsc=.276f1181-a283-4d29-b8b5-bbe45a4eccf6@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 22:16:01 GMT, Phil Race <prr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I was also wondering how this was tested.
>
> FYI, the way to test this is ..
> cd test/jdk
> jtreg sanity/client/SwingSet/src/TableDemoTest.java
> 
> I tried converting all ^M to \n in this file another repo and comparing with your patch but every line was different so I just can't review this.

For safety reasons I've restored this file as well as all the files in unit tests.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896338401

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 14:57:36 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 14:57:36 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
Message-ID: <LWyDWVBvPHM-9HkpB7pI5vh4Ppr-pNufCTbqGlBEhBE=.9917b618-876d-4744-8d1f-f59b137984c8@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:23 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.
>
> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>  - Do not touch files in test.
>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.

I've reviewed doc/hotspot-unit-tests.* and the Makefile.

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

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2522037503

From liach at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 15:48:38 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 15:48:38 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>
Message-ID: <ktubNHz_TCetvRrfrZyA2vZwT-fgByExGIWP4wz9y_8=.76156a02-8901-4ea3-9373-0a0ff8385b56@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:28:31 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> test/hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary/ctw/Makefile line 50:
>> 
>>> 48:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jdk/test/lib/util \
>>> 49:     $(TESTLIBRARY_DIR)/jtreg \
>>> 50:     -maxdepth 1 -name '*.java')
>> 
>> I wonder why this hasn't caused problems and been found long ago?  Does make just drop that stray
>> close-paren?
>
> I've tested this by running `make`, and the previous Makefile reports an error like file `test/lib/jtreg/SkippedException.java)` not found. So this fix is necessary.
> 
> I also checked the git log, this change was introduced in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22420, not that long ago.

Hmm, apparently this is not run as part of tier 1-3, which I ran in my patch.  I wonder how this test is run.  And it means this patch needs to be backported to 24.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896838026

From liach at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 15:48:37 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 15:48:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
Message-ID: <dlNpmJp8MDFrFYWDsN0BOkDNw5MOiJB1AoEx6VfQC5g=.794bdb89-b349-49a3-88aa-9f41dc5bfc23@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:23 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.
>
> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>  - Do not touch files in test.
>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.

Thanks for the ctw fix.

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

Marked as reviewed by liach (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2522077710

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 20:30:37 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 20:30:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <ktubNHz_TCetvRrfrZyA2vZwT-fgByExGIWP4wz9y_8=.76156a02-8901-4ea3-9373-0a0ff8385b56@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>
 <ktubNHz_TCetvRrfrZyA2vZwT-fgByExGIWP4wz9y_8=.76156a02-8901-4ea3-9373-0a0ff8385b56@github.com>
Message-ID: <StDuMPfHR9hLUHWhsyfBJFXCkQPVnhd5HDC95-61a1U=.850e539f-767e-49ba-ad06-81c0e9b8e140@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 15:45:24 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I've tested this by running `make`, and the previous Makefile reports an error like file `test/lib/jtreg/SkippedException.java)` not found. So this fix is necessary.
>> 
>> I also checked the git log, this change was introduced in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22420, not that long ago.
>
> Hmm, apparently this is not run as part of tier 1-3, which I ran in my patch.  I wonder how this test is run.  And it means this patch needs to be backported to 24.

Only this small piece would be appropriate for backport to 24.  I suggest splitting this out into its own bug,
fixing it in isolation, and backporting that.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896952109

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 22:25:41 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 22:25:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <StDuMPfHR9hLUHWhsyfBJFXCkQPVnhd5HDC95-61a1U=.850e539f-767e-49ba-ad06-81c0e9b8e140@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>
 <ktubNHz_TCetvRrfrZyA2vZwT-fgByExGIWP4wz9y_8=.76156a02-8901-4ea3-9373-0a0ff8385b56@github.com>
 <StDuMPfHR9hLUHWhsyfBJFXCkQPVnhd5HDC95-61a1U=.850e539f-767e-49ba-ad06-81c0e9b8e140@github.com>
Message-ID: <asOSxb9S_XZtKx7RIBj-VVYdhN4Qy95J65pO7CJXHKk=.032eeb6a-86c3-4be6-909a-35ebcd0223b7@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 20:27:37 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Hmm, apparently this is not run as part of tier 1-3, which I ran in my patch.  I wonder how this test is run.  And it means this patch needs to be backported to 24.
>
> Only this small piece would be appropriate for backport to 24.  I suggest splitting this out into its own bug,
> fixing it in isolation, and backporting that.

The purpose of this Makefile seems to be to build ctw.jar. So far as I can tell, nothing in the JDK uses that jar,
or invokes that Makefile. There are some tests for the ctw component in hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary_tests/ctw. I
think if you ran tier4 testing that you would hit those. Or you could use `TEST=hotspot:hotspot_misc`, or
specify that directory.  But those tests don't appear to use that jar. So I think there isn't a test that touches
this Makefile.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1896981987

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Tue Dec 24 22:36:47 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 22:36:47 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <2MNSzuaI99GRQMqD4tbU5VMfHjwfm3KzzTBySopxKJM=.af677925-5588-456c-86c0-7bb262c2cec2@github.com>
Message-ID: <5RJCjU8mibDWRUFIu_5QaivS78cZGFT1ECjS4_f2Z8E=.a8ff6fd5-cba0-40f5-b754-9bdb6f7e8d4b@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 03:26:23 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.
>
> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Update `hotspot-unit-tests.md` and HTML (using Pandoc 2.19.2).
>  - Do not touch files in test.
>  - Do not touch upstream data from CLDR.

The fix for the ctw Makefile should not be included in this PR.  It's a bug, and needs
to be fixed separately and backported to 24 to fix the introduction there via the
backport of JDK-8334733 from 25 to 24, without dragging the rest of this back to 24.

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

Changes requested by kbarrett (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2522228423

From lmesnik at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 25 01:47:37 2024
From: lmesnik at openjdk.org (Leonid Mesnik)
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2024 01:47:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <asOSxb9S_XZtKx7RIBj-VVYdhN4Qy95J65pO7CJXHKk=.032eeb6a-86c3-4be6-909a-35ebcd0223b7@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <8pTor9oXFFHRouI1-vrAKdlTzPX9cHlU5s3RbqxBx34=.3b5db6b0-d8ee-4ac9-b29e-d3bbf21740d3@github.com>
 <ktubNHz_TCetvRrfrZyA2vZwT-fgByExGIWP4wz9y_8=.76156a02-8901-4ea3-9373-0a0ff8385b56@github.com>
 <StDuMPfHR9hLUHWhsyfBJFXCkQPVnhd5HDC95-61a1U=.850e539f-767e-49ba-ad06-81c0e9b8e140@github.com>
 <asOSxb9S_XZtKx7RIBj-VVYdhN4Qy95J65pO7CJXHKk=.032eeb6a-86c3-4be6-909a-35ebcd0223b7@github.com>
Message-ID: <7rkkA5WQNof4ipfVB0NnpXU1o_nHsPmW3rulRPp78ZU=.593fc62d-f6ae-4885-b6db-09822cfb45ef@github.com>

On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 22:22:28 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Only this small piece would be appropriate for backport to 24.  I suggest splitting this out into its own bug,
>> fixing it in isolation, and backporting that.
>
> The purpose of this Makefile seems to be to build ctw.jar. So far as I can tell, nothing in the JDK uses that jar,
> or invokes that Makefile. There are some tests for the ctw component in hotspot/jtreg/testlibrary_tests/ctw. I
> think if you ran tier4 testing that you would hit those. Or you could use `TEST=hotspot:hotspot_misc`, or
> specify that directory.  But those tests don't appear to use that jar. So I think there isn't a test that touches
> this Makefile.

This makefile is not used by jtreg tests. The ctw code is compiled with 
`@library /test/lib / /testlibrary/ctw/src`
so jtreg compiled the ctw library files itself.
This makefile might be used for standalone build if needed.
Thanks for fixing this!

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#discussion_r1897036236

From qxing at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 25 02:34:16 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2024 02:34:16 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v3]
In-Reply-To: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
Message-ID: <SCztXJSKpXnWls5xQGQa_WLe5lxq4DOr9qCSrVPqY40=.84c5d360-e022-4978-88a1-8c3c2348c2a9@github.com>

> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.

Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Revert fix in the CTW Makefile.

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861/files/ec3e6aa5..7f85c5e3

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22861&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=22861&range=01-02

  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22861/head:pull/22861

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861

From qxing at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 25 02:37:41 2024
From: qxing at openjdk.org (Qizheng Xing)
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2024 02:37:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v3]
In-Reply-To: <o9cZHHS4iQ1l-qTxASqqtTQ6WMijrJ0ZDrPrOYSYzak=.e40da9cf-374f-44b0-ae3c-3f48b77f5df6@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SKV4vB0onb6Vw2U8fySvy-mQVH2x82YqC2Ys9qO0nAY=.ec464613-4024-459d-855b-b5890ee96ed7@github.com>
 <o9cZHHS4iQ1l-qTxASqqtTQ6WMijrJ0ZDrPrOYSYzak=.e40da9cf-374f-44b0-ae3c-3f48b77f5df6@github.com>
Message-ID: <lfbJHjq8KIOjVlG1hsR_nMbCSJ98DVHO8psUkvciZ88=.afbd9575-ea1a-4a19-a483-999917c01510@github.com>

On Mon, 23 Dec 2024 19:42:34 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I strongly suggest avoiding omnibus changes like this when possible (which it
>> is here). Just because it's all about one "kind" of change doesn't make it a
>> cohesive change. This is touching many distinct areas of the JDK, and several
>> different languages as well. That makes it harder to review and to manage the
>> review, because it is large and affects a wide range of areas, so may need
>> many reviewers. And the whole thing might get stalled by discussion of one
>> piece.
>> 
>> There is also no mention of what testing has been done for this PR. Some of
>> the changes are in executable code, and need to be tested.
>> 
>> I think that all of the files in make/data/cldr/common are from the Unicode
>> Consortium, and should not be modified here.
>
>> That makes it harder to review and to manage the review, because it is large and affects a wide range of areas, so may need many reviewers.
> 
> And many of the appropriate reviewers might be unavailable for a while, since it's right before Christmas.

@kimbarrett @liach Thanks for your suggestions!

I've moved the fix for the CTW Makefile to a separate pull request: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/22878, please check it.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#issuecomment-2561558033

From kbarrett at openjdk.org  Wed Dec 25 04:57:39 2024
From: kbarrett at openjdk.org (Kim Barrett)
Date: Wed, 25 Dec 2024 04:57:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8346773: Fix unmatched brackets in source files
 [v3]
In-Reply-To: <SCztXJSKpXnWls5xQGQa_WLe5lxq4DOr9qCSrVPqY40=.84c5d360-e022-4978-88a1-8c3c2348c2a9@github.com>
References: <Ahoe6wxmlEDW1RD4NxmCAXjJHguK_eWa7G_UCRjmdvc=.66cf0125-baef-4e4c-97dd-a411b45bbea2@github.com>
 <SCztXJSKpXnWls5xQGQa_WLe5lxq4DOr9qCSrVPqY40=.84c5d360-e022-4978-88a1-8c3c2348c2a9@github.com>
Message-ID: <RqSpJLzAEPtdnM_px2zUHBK8OWqoSsBiQABho0fLUAY=.f409be95-8db4-4e5b-9337-313a7256461e@github.com>

On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 02:34:16 GMT, Qizheng Xing <qxing at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This patch fixes unmatched brackets in some source files.
>
> Qizheng Xing has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Revert fix in the CTW Makefile.

Looks good.

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

Marked as reviewed by kbarrett (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22861#pullrequestreview-2522326924

From duke at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 26 16:42:41 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (Brett Okken)
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 16:42:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
Message-ID: <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:06:16 GMT, Naoto Sato <naoto at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The change made in [JDK-8288723](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8288723) seems innocuous, but it caused this performance regression. Partially reverting the change (ones that involve `computeIfAbsent()`) to the original. Provided a benchmark that iterates the call to `ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds(0)` 1,000 times, which improves the operation time from 3,946ns to 2,241ns.
>
> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fixed compile error

src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/format/DateTimeTextProvider.java line 316:

> 314:             store = createStore(field, locale);
> 315:             CACHE.putIfAbsent(key, store);
> 316:             store = CACHE.get(key);

should this be 
`store = CACHE.computeIfAbsent(key, e -> createStore(e.getKey(), e.getValue()));`

That still allow the optimistic/concurrent get call to succeed most of the time (when already cached) but reduce the interactions with the map when a value is created/set/accessed the first time.

Alternatively, the result of `putIfAbsent` could be checked/used to avoid the second call to `get`.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1898012555

From aturbanov at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 26 17:28:35 2024
From: aturbanov at openjdk.org (Andrey Turbanov)
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 17:28:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>
Message-ID: <r4q1l33xYT8Rdob4YGqrhxdiNhtIUwb_s12zei30aDA=.0a8d15f3-4f73-4312-a136-ff36589d4aaf@github.com>

On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 16:39:58 GMT, Brett Okken <duke at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Naoto Sato has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   Fixed compile error
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/format/DateTimeTextProvider.java line 316:
> 
>> 314:             store = createStore(field, locale);
>> 315:             CACHE.putIfAbsent(key, store);
>> 316:             store = CACHE.get(key);
> 
> should this be 
> `store = CACHE.computeIfAbsent(key, e -> createStore(e.getKey(), e.getValue()));`
> 
> That still allow the optimistic/concurrent get call to succeed most of the time (when already cached) but reduce the interactions with the map when a value is created/set/accessed the first time.
> 
> Alternatively, the result of `putIfAbsent` could be checked/used to avoid the second call to `get`.

For sure we should use result of `putIfAbsent`. Let's do this for all cases. See how it was implemented in my first commit - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/9208/commits/73a2f6cb1b91f4d7ee374089f35a72ef7b94433b

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1898031238

From duke at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 26 19:42:45 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (duke)
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 19:42:45 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> =?utf-8?q?Withdrawn=3A_8335791=3A_Speed_=E2=80=8B?=
 =?utf-8?b?4oCLdXAgai51LkZvcm1hdHRlciAmIFN0cmluZy5mb3JtYXQ=?=
In-Reply-To: <MKjElzY83ptZtbn4Ej-U0VCoQJyO_6Q_fV2VwFX_P4U=.e82b0dfe-f49f-4c4b-9264-708016bfbf66@github.com>
References: <MKjElzY83ptZtbn4Ej-U0VCoQJyO_6Q_fV2VwFX_P4U=.e82b0dfe-f49f-4c4b-9264-708016bfbf66@github.com>
Message-ID: <3UduOadS7bDdKdv4JdRzd4Wg0VosJwCGK47sEWt6K3c=.d4a3a18f-caf4-442e-9603-f85375385629@github.com>

On Fri, 5 Jul 2024 15:40:24 GMT, Shaojin Wen <swen at openjdk.org> wrote:

> String.format is widely used, and improving its performance is very meaningful. This PR can significantly improve the performance of String.format. Sorry, there are many changes, which will take a lot of time. I hope you can review it patiently.
> 
> 
> Improved performance includes the following:
> 
> ## 1. Write directly during the parse process to reduce object allocation.
> 
> In the current Formatter implementation, some objects do not need to be allocated, such as:
> 
> 
> class Formatter {
>     public Formatter format(Locale l, String format, Object ... args) {
>     	List<FormatString> fsa = parse(format);
>     	// ...
>     }
> 
>     static List<FormatString> parse(String s) {
>     	ArrayList<FormatString> al = new ArrayList<>();
> 
>         while (i < max) {
>             int n = s.indexOf('%', i);
>             if (n < 0) {
>                 // 
>                 al.add(new FixedString(s, i, max));
>             }
>         }
>     }
> }
> 
> In the process of parsing, the content that is not a Specifier is directly appended without going through FixedString. By directly printing the parsed FormatString object, there is no need to construct a `List<FormatString> fsa` to store it.
> 
> ## 2. Fast path print
> Use specialized FormatString implementations for single-character and single-width specifiers to avoid calling the large FormatSpecifier#print method.
> 
> ## 3. String.format directly calls j.u.Formatter
> String.format directly calls j.u.Formatter via SharedSecrets to improve performance

This pull request has been closed without being integrated.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20055

From duke at openjdk.org  Thu Dec 26 19:43:48 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (duke)
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 19:43:48 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> Withdrawn: 8335366: Improve String.format performance
 with fastpath
In-Reply-To: <7UuohcnXK5YTn1--FaQc0Pf6SA99Dau6PJWE6U9NjEk=.db32c5d6-d59d-40fe-85bc-e64223a2693c@github.com>
References: <7UuohcnXK5YTn1--FaQc0Pf6SA99Dau6PJWE6U9NjEk=.db32c5d6-d59d-40fe-85bc-e64223a2693c@github.com>
Message-ID: <MWGFV7_PzhyFCyiXRSBQw7GT_EZ3yY6bpMFfWg3KG8k=.7e131757-57a3-40e0-9564-cfcb950fe7e7@github.com>

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:53:31 GMT, Shaojin Wen <swen at openjdk.org> wrote:

> We need a String format solution with good performance. String Template was once expected, but it has been removed. j.u.Formatter is powerful, but its performance is not good enough.
> 
> This PR implements a subset of j.u.Formatter capabilities. The performance is good enough that it is a fastpath for commonly used functions. When the supported functions are exceeded, it will fall back to using j.u.Formatter.
> 
> The performance of this implementation is good enough, the fastpath has low detection cost, There is no noticeable performance degradation when falling back to j.u.Formatter via fastpath.
> 
> Below is a comparison of String.format and concat-based and StringBuilder:
> 
> * benchmark java code
> 
> public class StringFormat {
>     @Benchmark
>     public String stringIntFormat() {
>         return "%s %d".formatted(s, i);
>     }
> 
>     @Benchmark
>     public String stringIntConcat() {
>         return s + " " + i;
>     }
> 
>     @Benchmark
>     public String stringIntStringBuilder() {
>         return new StringBuilder(s).append(" ").append(i).toString();
>     }
> }
> 
> 
> * benchmark number on macbook m1 pro
> 
> Benchmark                            Mode  Cnt   Score   Error  Units
> StringFormat.stringIntConcat         avgt   15   6.541 ? 0.056  ns/op
> StringFormat.stringIntFormat         avgt   15  17.399 ? 0.133  ns/op
> StringFormat.stringIntStringBuilder  avgt   15   8.004 ? 0.063  ns/op
> 
> 
> From the above data, we can see that the implementation of fastpath reduces the performance difference between String.format and StringBuilder from 10 times to 2~3 times.
> 
> The implementation of fastpath supports the following four specifiers, which can appear at most twice and support a width of 1 to 9.
> 
> d
> x
> X
> s
> 
> If necessary, we can add a few more.
> 
> 
> Below is a comparison of performance numbers running on a MacBook M1, showing a significant performance improvement.
> 
> -Benchmark                          Mode  Cnt    Score    Error  Units (baseline)
> -StringFormat.complexFormat         avgt   15  895.954 ? 52.541  ns/op
> -StringFormat.decimalFormat         avgt   15  277.420 ? 18.254  ns/op
> -StringFormat.stringFormat          avgt   15   66.787 ?  2.715  ns/op
> -StringFormat.stringIntFormat       avgt   15   81.046 ?  1.879  ns/op
> -StringFormat.widthStringFormat     avgt   15   38.897 ?  0.114  ns/op
> -StringFormat.widthStringIntFormat  avgt   15  109.841 ?  1.028  ns/op
> 
> +Benchmark                          Mode  Cnt    Score    Error  Units (current f925339e93fdf7a281462554ce5d73139bd0f0cd)
> +StringFormat.complexF...

This pull request has been closed without being integrated.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19956

From acobbs at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 27 16:29:41 2024
From: acobbs at openjdk.org (Archie Cobbs)
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 16:29:41 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <r4q1l33xYT8Rdob4YGqrhxdiNhtIUwb_s12zei30aDA=.0a8d15f3-4f73-4312-a136-ff36589d4aaf@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>
 <r4q1l33xYT8Rdob4YGqrhxdiNhtIUwb_s12zei30aDA=.0a8d15f3-4f73-4312-a136-ff36589d4aaf@github.com>
Message-ID: <tkyZ2qO31VkS_URx9-MAleSjwSZ5z07mbx8sTWHTXxE=.a746c9e1-98cf-4030-9763-4029f0e214da@github.com>

On Thu, 26 Dec 2024 17:25:55 GMT, Andrey Turbanov <aturbanov at openjdk.org> wrote:

> For sure we should use result of `putIfAbsent`

Drive-by comment...

>From what i can infer, the performance regression being addressed here is caused in part by the fact that (for example) `ConcurrentHashMap.computeIfAbsent()` provides an atomicity guarantee, which is a stronger requirement than is necessary here, and therefore by splitting up that call up into two separate, non-atomic `get()` and `put()` calls we get (counter-intuitively) faster execution time, even though there are more lines of code. Note `putIfAbsent()` also guarantees atomicity, so the same problem of slowness caused by "unnecessary atomicity" might occur with it as well.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1898609222

From liach at openjdk.org  Fri Dec 27 23:27:39 2024
From: liach at openjdk.org (Chen Liang)
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2024 23:27:39 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <tkyZ2qO31VkS_URx9-MAleSjwSZ5z07mbx8sTWHTXxE=.a746c9e1-98cf-4030-9763-4029f0e214da@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>
 <r4q1l33xYT8Rdob4YGqrhxdiNhtIUwb_s12zei30aDA=.0a8d15f3-4f73-4312-a136-ff36589d4aaf@github.com>
 <tkyZ2qO31VkS_URx9-MAleSjwSZ5z07mbx8sTWHTXxE=.a746c9e1-98cf-4030-9763-4029f0e214da@github.com>
Message-ID: <d9pu3n4fjH9djkSxPf3ywhZ_33udY9nm7k7XGfh_tsA=.032723ec-d409-41ca-a6cd-fb7feb353c10@github.com>

On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 16:27:10 GMT, Archie Cobbs <acobbs at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> For sure we should use result of `putIfAbsent`. Let's do this for all cases. See how it was implemented in my first commit - https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/9208/commits/73a2f6cb1b91f4d7ee374089f35a72ef7b94433b
>
>> For sure we should use result of `putIfAbsent`
> 
> Drive-by comment...
> 
> From what i can infer, the performance regression being addressed here is caused in part by the fact that (for example) `ConcurrentHashMap.computeIfAbsent()` provides an atomicity guarantee, which is a stronger requirement than is necessary here, and therefore by splitting up that call up into two separate, non-atomic `get()` and `put()` calls we get (counter-intuitively) faster execution time, even though there are more lines of code. Note `putIfAbsent()` also guarantees atomicity, so the same problem of slowness caused by "unnecessary atomicity" might occur with it as well.

Indeed, just noticed that both `computeIfAbsent` and `putIfAbsent` may acquire the lock when the key is present, while `get` never acquires a lock for read-only access.

Maybe the implementation was written back when locking was less costly (with biased locking, etc.). Now we might have to reconsider locking until we know for sure a plain get fails.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1898748424

From jwaters at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 30 13:46:35 2024
From: jwaters at openjdk.org (Julian Waters)
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 13:46:35 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8342868: Errors related to unused code on
 Windows after 8339120 in core libs [v2]
In-Reply-To: <vT6zJlWPUg235GuAHNJbyAxkoONF2vljAuFTVygBoGk=.05690f62-9641-4990-855a-c908df24e064@github.com>
References: <otTjiRgCFQEeUbpfFTMzhXUVBU1cal8q_i7IrGs_n94=.c2f02ad8-6b0c-4daa-9995-8e4b42131eb4@github.com>
 <vT6zJlWPUg235GuAHNJbyAxkoONF2vljAuFTVygBoGk=.05690f62-9641-4990-855a-c908df24e064@github.com>
Message-ID: <n8WMfkF4ZLDbIzuIui1DhLWh-xU3O8qTnaLaVxO0S3g=.a03d2d51-2db2-413d-8776-5826ea33c907@github.com>

On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 05:43:11 GMT, Julian Waters <jwaters at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> After 8339120, gcc began catching many different instances of unused code in the Windows specific codebase. Some of these seem to be bugs. I've taken the effort to mark out all the relevant globals and locals that trigger the unused warnings and addressed all of them by commenting out the code as appropriate. I am confident that in many cases this simplistic approach of commenting out code does not fix the underlying issue, and the warning actually found a bug that should be fixed. In these instances, I will be aiming to fix these bugs with help from reviewers, so I recommend anyone reviewing who knows more about the code than I do to see whether there is indeed a bug that needs fixing in a different way than what I did
>
> Julian Waters has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove the got local

Stop asking, I still need awt and accessibility to be approved :(

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21654#issuecomment-2565503212

From duke at openjdk.org  Mon Dec 30 17:46:37 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (Brett Okken)
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 17:46:37 GMT
Subject: <i18n dev> RFR: 8345668: ZoneOffset.ofTotalSeconds performance
 regression [v3]
In-Reply-To: <d9pu3n4fjH9djkSxPf3ywhZ_33udY9nm7k7XGfh_tsA=.032723ec-d409-41ca-a6cd-fb7feb353c10@github.com>
References: <XbuVGajTAMIYOwhXParn36Bsy0P-sqpYBI8c45kUp-I=.03ac3c5b-415f-497a-8166-cfa12b286e9d@github.com>
 <N7_1jRsvTDByBgphriwMi9AhebHxYx4zwG3RkndA4ik=.2c27c204-5da7-4fad-be40-25581e0ffde9@github.com>
 <ULt2U_X-dxbhokxfHnjQ2-Lj5cXDTLtS1M8lc8EMLWA=.3b31de56-4b84-4405-89e6-d610d53351fe@github.com>
 <r4q1l33xYT8Rdob4YGqrhxdiNhtIUwb_s12zei30aDA=.0a8d15f3-4f73-4312-a136-ff36589d4aaf@github.com>
 <tkyZ2qO31VkS_URx9-MAleSjwSZ5z07mbx8sTWHTXxE=.a746c9e1-98cf-4030-9763-4029f0e214da@github.com>
 <d9pu3n4fjH9djkSxPf3ywhZ_33udY9nm7k7XGfh_tsA=.032723ec-d409-41ca-a6cd-fb7feb353c10@github.com>
Message-ID: <DiWapupIcSNG-swF_GpkVlM2-6np4drmAF3RMp65yv0=.decf6076-89cc-4831-9267-101ba3461583@github.com>

On Fri, 27 Dec 2024 23:24:46 GMT, Chen Liang <liach at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> For sure we should use result of `putIfAbsent`
>> 
>> Drive-by comment...
>> 
>> From what i can infer, the performance regression being addressed here is caused in part by the fact that (for example) `ConcurrentHashMap.computeIfAbsent()` provides an atomicity guarantee, which is a stronger requirement than is necessary here, and therefore by splitting up that call up into two separate, non-atomic `get()` and `put()` calls we get (counter-intuitively) faster execution time, even though there are more lines of code. Note `putIfAbsent()` also guarantees atomicity, so the same problem of slowness caused by "unnecessary atomicity" might occur with it as well.
>
> Indeed, just noticed that both `computeIfAbsent` and `putIfAbsent` may acquire the lock when the key is present, while `get` never acquires a lock for read-only access.
> 
> Maybe the implementation was written back when locking was less costly (with biased locking, etc.). Now we might have to reconsider locking until we know for sure a plain get fails.

This scenario is discussed in Effective Java by Joshua Block. His observation then (java 5/6 time frame?) was optimistically calling `get` first and only calling `putIfAbsent` or `computeIfAbsent` if the `get` returned `null` was 250% faster, and this is because calls to put/compute ifAbsent have contention. There have been changes made to those methods since then to try to avoid synchronization when the key is already present, but the observation seems to confirm that the optimistic `get` call first is still faster (though a much smaller difference).

My comment was not to revert back to the prior change of just calling `computeIfAbsent`, but rather just to change the (expected rare) case when the first `get` returns `null` to replace the `putIfAbsent` and second `get` call with a single `computeIfAbsent` (or utilize the result of `putIfAbsent` to avoid the second call to `get`).

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22854#discussion_r1899699668