RFR 8067447: Factor out the shared implementation of the VM flags manipulation code

[David Holmes]

On 6/02/2015 1:17 AM, Jaroslav Bachorik wrote:
> On 5.2.2015 14:55, Staffan Larsen wrote:
>> Jaroslav,
>>
>> This looks good, just a few small comments:
>>
>> writableFlags.hpp:
>>
>> L25 #ifndef WritableFlags_HPP
>> L26 #define WritableFlags_HPP
>> L96 #endif /* WritableFlags_HPP */
>> Should be SHARE_VM_SERVICES_WRITABLEFLAG_HPP
>>
>> L32: I don’t like inverted logic such as “NO_ERR”. I would prefer
>> “SUCCESS” instead.
>>
>> writableFlags.cpp:
>>
>> L25: #include statements should be in alphabetical order if possible
>> L166: (nit) missing empty line
>> L155: I notice the Flag class uses “writeable” (with an ‘e’) and this
>> class uses “writable” (without ‘e’) - My english isn’t good enough to
>> tell if there is any difference.
>
> They should be equal in meaning. According to GooglBattle [1] the form
> 'writable' is far wider spread but I would leave the decision to a
> native speaker.
>
> [1]
> http://www.googlebattle.com/index.php?domain=writeable&domain2=writable&submit=Go!
>
>
>> L194: Unused variable “succeed"
>
> The rest of the comments will be addressed. I will wait for eg. David to
> comment on 'writable' vs. 'writeable' before regenerating the webrev.

Take your pick. Both are used in the hotspot sources eg globals.hpp 
contains is_writeable() and check_writable() :(

It is on my TODO list to review this ASAP.

David



> -JB-
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> /Staffan
>>
>>> On 4 feb 2015, at 17:55, Jaroslav Bachorik
>>> <jaroslav.bachorik at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi, this is a round 2 review of the proposed solution.
>>>
>>> Issue : https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8067447
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8067447/webrev.02
>>>
>>> This patch is a precursor for implementing
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8054890 which itself is a
>>> part of JEP-228 (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8043764).
>>>
>>> Here, the code related to manipulating JVM flags is extracted to a
>>> separate WritableFlags class and the codebease is adjusted to use
>>> this class.
>>>
>>> I didn't touch the original (nonstandard) handling of the DTrace
>>> specific flags in the Solaris specific attachListener.cpp
>>> implementation to keep the change simple and focused.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -JB-
>>
>