RFR: 8241080: Consolidate signature parsing code in serviceability tools

[Daniil Titov]

Hi Chris and Serguei,

Thank you for reviewing this change.

Best regards,
Daniil

On 5/18/20, 12:41 PM, "Chris Plummer" <chris.plummer at oracle.com> wrote:

    Looks good.

    thanks,

    Chris

    On 5/14/20 1:33 PM, Daniil Titov wrote:
    > Hi Serguei and Chris,
    >
    > Please review a new version of the change [1] that addresses your comments.
    >
    > Testing: Mach5 tier1-tier5 tests successfully passed.
    >
    > Regarding CR for the JDWP spec issues related to missing type information  in some of the protocol packet descriptions [3], as Chris has just noticed
    > we  really don't need it, so I withdrew this CR.
    >
    > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8241080/webrev.02
    > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8241080 	
    > [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8245057
    >
    > Thank you,
    > Daniil
    >
    >
    > From: "serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com" <serguei.spitsyn at oracle.com>
    > Date: Monday, May 11, 2020 at 11:53 AM
    > To: Daniil Titov <daniil.x.titov at oracle.com>, serviceability-dev <serviceability-dev at openjdk.java.net>
    > Subject: Re: RFR: 8241080: Consolidate signature parsing code in serviceability tools
    >
    > Hi Daniil,
    >
    > It looks pretty good in general.
    > A couple of nits below.
    >
    > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8241080/webrev.01/src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/invoker.c.udiff.html
    > +    void *cursor;
    > +    jbyte argumentTag;
    > +    jint argIndex = 0;
    > +    jvalue *argument = request->arguments;;
    > . . .
    >       void *cursor;
    >       jint argIndex = 0;
    > +    jbyte argumentTag;
    >       jvalue *argument = request->arguments;
    >
    > It is better if the local variables 'cursor' and 'argumentTag' get initialized.
    > There is double semicolon: "arguments;;"
    >
    >
    > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8241080/webrev.01/src/jdk.jdwp.agent/share/native/libjdwp/signature.h.html
    >    43 static inline jbyte basicType(const char *signature) {
    >
    > It'd be nice to rename it to basicTypeTag() to get it unified with other functions below.
    >
    > It is more safe to run tier5 as well.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Serguei
    >
    >
    > On 5/9/20 09:29, Daniil Titov wrote:
    > Please review a change[1] that centralizes the signature processing in serviceability tools to make it capable of being easily extensible in the future.
    >
    > Testing: Mach5 tier1-tier3 tests successfully passed.
    >
    > [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dtitov/8241080/webrev.01
    > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8241080
    >
    > Thank you,
    > Daniil
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >