RFR(M): 8233787: Break cycle in vm_version* includes
david.holmes at oracle.com
Mon Nov 11 10:54:47 UTC 2019
Also note we have an open RFE to try and fix the VM_Version vs
Abstract_VM_version mess. But it's such a mess it keeps getting deferred.
On 9/11/2019 11:58 am, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> On Nov 7, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Schmidt, Lutz <lutz.schmidt at sap.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> may I please request reviews for this cleanup? It's a lot of files with just some #include statement changes. That makes the review process tedious and not very challenging intellectually.
>> Anyway, your effort is very much appreciated!
>> jdk/submit results pending.
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233787
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lucy/webrevs/8233787.00/
>> Thank you!
> I don't think this is the right approach. It makes all the
> vm_version_<cpu>.hpp files not be stand alone, which I think is not a
> good idea.
> I thik the real problem is that Abstract_VM_Version is declared in
> vm_version.hpp. I think that file should be split into
> abstract_vm_version.hpp (with most of what's currently in
> vm_version.hpp), with vm_version.hpp being just (untested)
> #ifndef SHARE_RUNTIME_VM_VERSION_HPP
> #define SHARE_RUNTIME_VM_VERSION_HPP
> #include "utilities/macros.hpp"
> #include CPU_HEADER(vm_version)
> #endif // SHARE_RUNTIME_VM_VERSION_HPP
> Change all the vm_version_<cpu>.hpp files #include
> abstract_vm_version.hpp rather than vm_version.hpp.
> Other than in vm_version_<cpu>.hpp files, always #include
More information about the hotspot-dev