RFR(L): 8049325: Introduce and clean up umbrella headers for the files in the cpu subdirectories
lois.foltan at oracle.com
Wed Jul 9 12:37:22 UTC 2014
On 7/8/2014 10:23 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Lois,
> On 9/07/2014 3:42 AM, Lois Foltan wrote:
>> Hi Goetz,
>> Overall this cleanup looks good. Here are specific comments per file:
>> - include nativeInst.hpp instead of nativeInst_ppc.hpp
> Hmmm - doesn't this go against the argument Coleen was making with
> regard to the other umbrella header situation? She said a platform
> specific file should include the platform specific header rather than
> the generic top-level header.
> I must admit I'm not completely convinced as it depends on whether the
> platform specific implementation calls generic functions that may or
> may not have a platform specific implementation.
Yes, you are correct, I looked back to some of the email discussion from
JDK-8048241. I share your thoughts on this topic but will defer since
this was a recent discussion. Goetz, please disregard my comments about
including <file>.hpp instead of <file>_platform.hpp below. I think this
just affected src/cpu/ppc/vm/runtime_ppc.cpp and
>> - include nativeInst.hpp instead of nativeInst_sparc.hpp
>> - include vmreg.inline.hpp instead of vmreg_sparc.inline.hpp
>> (however this could pull in more code than needed since
>> vmreg.inline.hpp also includes asm/register.hpp and code/vmreg.hpp)
>> - change not related to clean up of umbrella headers, please
>> - Can lines #143-#15 be replaced by an inclusion of
>> vmreg.inline.hpp or will
>> this introduce a cyclical inclusion situation, since
>> vmreg.inline.hpp includes vmreg.hpp?
>> - only has a copyright change in the file, no other changes
>> - incorrect copyright, no current year?
>> - incorrect copyright date for a new file
>> - technically this new file does not need to include
>> "asm/register.hpp" since
>> vmreg.hpp already includes it
>> My only lingering concern is the cyclical nature of
>> vmreg.hpp/vmreg.inline.hpp. It might be better to not introduce the new
>> file "vmreg.inline.hpp" in favor of having files include vmreg.hpp
>> instead? Again since vmreg.inline.hpp includes vmreg.hpp there really
>> is not much difference between the two?
>> On 7/7/2014 4:52 AM, Lindenmaier, Goetz wrote:
>>> I decided to clean up the remaining include cascades, too.
>>> This change introduces umbrella headers for the files in the cpu
>>> It also cleans up the include cascades for adGlobals*.hpp,
>>> jniTypes*.hpp, vm_version*.hpp and register*.hpp.
>>> Where possible, this change avoids includes in headers.
>>> Eventually it adds a forward declaration.
>>> vmreg_<cpu>.inline.hpp contains functions declared in register_cpu.hpp
>>> and vmreg.hpp, so there is no obvious mapping to the shared files.
>>> Still, I did not split the files in the cpu directories, as they are
>>> rather small.
>>> I didn't introduce a file for adGlobals_<cpu>.hpp, as adGlobals mainly
>>> contains machine dependent, c2 specific register information. So I
>>> think optoreg.hpp is a good header to place the adGlobals_<cpu>.hpp
>>> includes in,
>>> and then use optoreg.hpp where symbols from adGlobals are needed.
>>> I moved the constructor and destructor of CodeletMark to the .cpp
>>> file, I don't think this is performance relevant. But having them in
>>> the header requirs to pull interp_masm.hpp into interpreter.hpp, and
>>> thus all the assembler include headers into a lot of files.
>>> Please review and test this change. I please need a sponsor.
>>> I compiled and tested this without precompiled headers on linuxx86_64,
>>> windowsx86_64, solaris_sparc64, solaris_sparc32, darwinx86_64,
>>> aixppc64, ntamd64
>>> in opt, dbg and fastdbg versions.
>>> Currently, the change applies to hs-rt, but once my other change
>>> arrives in other
>>> repos, it will work there, too. (I tested it together with the other
>>> against jdk9/dev, too.)
>>> Best regards,
>>> PS: I also did all the Copyright adaptions ;)
More information about the hotspot-dev