On 26 April 2018 at 23:55, Kim Barrett <kim.barr...@oracle.com> wrote:
snip... > > I disagree, and still think the perfMemory_linux.cpp change should be > removed. > > (1) The change to perfMemory_linux.cpp is entirely unnecessary to > address the problem this bug is about. > > (2) It violates the (implied) protocol for os::readdir. If > Linux-specific code wants to invoke Linux-specific behavior, it should > do so by calling a Linux-specific API, not abuse an intended to be > portable API. > > (3) It minorly interferes with some desirable future work. If there > were some significant benefit to doing so, I wouldn't give this much > weight, but I don't see a significant benefit. > > (4) The only benefit is saving some rare short-term memory > allocations. I don't think that's worth the above costs. > > Note that the Windows version of os::readdir also ignores the second > argument, but all callers provide it anyway. > > I've opened a new CR for general os::readdir cleanup. > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202353 > Ok, I see your points and don't feel particularly strongly either way. The original version of this patch I wrote didn't include those changes either. -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Web Site: http://fuseyism.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/gnu_andrew_java PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
